In a first-of-its-kind move, the California State Bar endorsed a plan to expunge attorney discipline records—other than disbarment—after eight years. The practical effect of the move is that public discipline would no longer appear on the lawyer’s state bar website profile.
The change is intended, in part, to lessen the impact of what was perceived as racial disparities in attorney discipline in California. A 2019 state bar-commissioned study had found that Black male attorneys in California—who currently make up just 1% of the state’s lawyers—were more than three times as likely to be placed on probation than white male attorneys.
Will other states follow? Many of the actions taken by the Attorney Grievance Committees in New York are not public. The Committees issue Letters of Advisement, which are not considered discipline, or Admonitions, which are considered discipline but are not public. The public forms of discipline—censure, suspension and disbarment—are only taken after formal proceedings are initiated in one of the four Appellate Divisions. There have been no studies in New York addressing racial disparities in the administration of public discipline against attorneys in New York, and with a recent rollback in DEI initiatives (AP has reported that McDonald’s is the latest company to eliminate diversity goals), it seems unlikely that there will be anytime soon.
The California proposal was not universally supported. In fact, Reuters reported that 445 comments were received during the public comment phase and 74% of those comments opposed the change. “Non-attorney members of the public [were] most heavily against it,” according to Reuters.
Some may argue that the public is entitled to complete transparency when hiring an attorney. Others may argue that the measure does not address the root cause of the problem it purports to address. What are your thoughts?
