New Justice Foresees Diversity in Judiciary : Courts: Although he is replacing a black, Ronald M. George expects Gov. Wilson to name women and minorities to posts throughout the system<i> .</i>

Gov. Pete Wilson’s selection of Justice Ronald M. George to the state Supreme Court was generally well received in legal circles. Yet there was some disappointment that the governor did not name a minority to succeed retiring Justice Allen E. Broussard, the court’s only black.

George, sworn into office last week, said in an interview he believes that minorities and women will grow in number throughout the California judiciary during Wilson’s tenure.

“It would be presumptuous to predict the nature of the governor’s appointments to particular posts,” said George, the Republican governor’s first appointee to the state high court. “But I think that as a general matter, we can expect a broad range of applicants will receive favorable consideration for judicial appointments.”

As a trial judge in the mid-1980s, George led an advisory committee that sought and evaluated federal judicial candidates in Southern California for Wilson when the governor was a U.S. senator. George said Wilson asked the group to recruit qualified minorities and women. Of 42 people Wilson recommended for posts as judges and U.S. attorneys, 15 were women or minorities, according to the governor’s office.

George said he welcomes diversity on the bench.

“That includes not only race and gender but other factors as well,” he said. “But I don’t feel that any particular seat should be a ‘minority’ seat or set aside only for a particular minority.”

The 51-year-old jurist discussed a wide range of subjects as he prepared to take the bench Tuesday, when the court will begin hearing a three-day series of arguments here.

On George’s desk were three mammoth loose-leaf binders--crammed with confidential court memorandums on pending cases--that he had been handed only minutes after he took the oath of office from Wilson in Los Angeles last Tuesday.

The new justice:

* Brushed aside suggestions that his appointment would further solidify the conservative majority that under Chief Justice Malcolm M. Lucas has dominated the court in recent years.

“I anticipate approaching (the new job) on a case-by-case basis and am unable to make any kind of predictions,” he said. “I like to think of myself as exercising my own independent judgment.”

* Rejected suggestions that the high court has bowed or would bow to electoral pressures in deciding cases in the wake of the unprecedented defeat of Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird and two other court members in the 1986 general election.

“I don’t think it would be worth having this position if one felt he had to look over his shoulder before making a decision,” he said. “I’d rather go down in flames before the electorate than start guessing what was popular or unpopular.”

* Said he had “definite views” on the liberal-dominated Bird court but declined to elaborate. Critics charged that the court stretched the law to achieve social goals and granted excessive protections to criminal defendants.

He did note that his philosophy of judicial restraint--in which courts should be generally cautious in expanding the law--was “certainly different from the principles that prevailed during the majority of the Bird court years.”

* Said courts should overturn judicial precedents only when past rulings have resulted in “unexpected or unwarranted consequences,” or conditions have substantially changed. “I don’t think precedents should be ignored or cases reversed, more or less randomly, just because there has been a change in personnel on the court.”

* Suggested that “good luck” is an important factor in judicial advancement. In his 19-year state judicial career, George has been named to judgeships by four governors.

“There are a lot of very good people who have had their judicial careers cut off simply because a change in (gubernatorial) administration precluded their advancement,” he said.

While Wilson knew George from Wilson’s judicial evaluation committee, the two through the years have had only limited social contacts, George said. Before his nomination to the high court, George was not interviewed by Wilson or anyone on the governor’s staff and was not asked about his judicial views, George said.

On July 26, three days before Wilson named George to the state high court, George received a telephone call from the governor. “I’d like to ask you a favor of you,” George quoted Wilson as saying. “Would you accept a seat on the Supreme Court?”

George said he did not need long to reflect.

“I gave him my immediate acceptance.”