Judicial Council Acts to Curb Sex Bias : Legal system: Many of the steps taken by the state panel are aimed at helping victims of domestic violence. Action follows finding of widespread bias against women in courts.

The state Judicial Council, acting in the wake of a landmark bias study, on Friday approved new court rules and urged a broad range of other steps to curb sex discrimination in the California legal system.

The 21-member council, the policy-making arm of the state judiciary, unanimously adopted 67 recommendations by a special council committee that in a three-year inquiry found widespread bias against women in the courts.

Many of the steps the council approved were aimed at helping victims of domestic violence. The group voted to provide around-the-clock availability of emergency restraining orders to prevent recurring violence; decided to advise prosecutors and police to treat domestic violence as seriously as crime involving strangers, and asked that judges receive special training on the nature of domestic violence.

“This is one of the most important areas we have dealt with,” said Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David M. Rothman, co-chair of the special committee. “This marks a profound change in the way the judiciary looks at and deals with that subject.”

The council, acting on a wide range of issues, also urged a new ethics code barring judges from membership in discriminatory clubs; adopted a new rule requiring gender-neutral language in local court forms and documents; and asked corrections officials to provide women inmates with less-cumbersome jail shackles that are “suitable to the female form.”

Many of the recommendations will be implemented in the form of new court rules by the council, which is made up of judges, lawyers and legislators and chaired by Chief Justice Malcolm M. Lucas.

But other steps will require action by the State Bar, the California Judges Assn., law school deans and the state Legislature. Council members expressed hope such action will come soon. “We don’t want this to be merely a report that gathers dust on the shelf,” said Appellate Justice Ronald M. George of Los Angeles, leader of a council group that reviewed the committee’s 680-page report.

Other officials noted that since release of the report last March, they had sensed a new sensitivity to sex discrimination in the legal system. William E. Davis, administrative director of the courts, said some judges have begun punishing lawyers who exhibit bias in the courtroom. “The attitudes have already changed within the judiciary,” Davis said.

The council’s investigation was one of the first of its kind in the nation and the most extensive in the state. At least 28 other states have launched similar inquiries.

The report cited instances of “openly hostile” behavior and demeaning remarks by judges against female lawyers, litigants and witnesses. It also found shortcomings in family law--such as inadequate child support--and in jailhouse facilities for women.

Since March, the council has received dozens of letters, most of them supporting its findings and recommendations. But there were assorted criticisms, as well.

Los Angeles Municipal Judge R. Bruce Minto noted that the massive report failed to consider sex bias against men in child-custody and support cases. The California National Organization for Women said that the judiciary should attain a gender balance reflecting the 52% female portion of the population. Mary C. Dunlap, a San Francisco gay-activist attorney, faulted the committee for failing to address “the treachery and damage of homophobia and of anti-lesbian attitudes” in the legal system.

Among other actions Friday the council voted to:

Authorize judges to read statements in court expressing their refusal to tolerate any bias in the courtroom.

Create pilot projects in three counties to develop grievance procedures for complaints of sex, racial or religious bias in the courts.

Urge the Legislature to extend child-support obligations to age 21.

Establish comprehensive policies providing for pregnancy and parental leave for judges.