Time on the Courts
In 1976, Cruz Reynoso was appointed by Governor Jerry Brown to California's 3rd District Court of Appeal, and for the next 10 years, Reynoso would serve as a judge. He oversaw many cases during these years, including DeRonde v Regents of California, which is discussed at further length in this digital exhibit. Reynoso's dedication to the equal application of law and to underserved and marginalized peoples resulted in conservative scrutiny. Indeed, as a member of the Rose Bird Court, Reynoso and fellow justices would be criticized for being too liberal or for supporting judicial activism. Despite facing some professional critiques and racial insults, Reynoso remained committed to his view of justice and did not waver. However, he would lose his retention election in 1986 and his time on the California Supreme Court came to an end.
Letter from Sergio Luis Lopez to Cruz Reynoso (1976)
Sergio Luis Lopez, a fellow attorney when Cruz Reynoso was appointed to the Court of Appeals, writes a letter of support for Cruz, citing specifically how Reynoso speaking Spanish made him feel great. Sergio Luis Lopez could identify with Cruz Reynoso and saw a bright future for him.
In Re Arthur Martinez (1976)
This is an opinion from a case entitled In Re Arthur Martinez. In the top left corner, Justice Reynoso identifies it as his first case.
"Judge Fears Effects of Bakke Decision," Oregon Daily Emerald (1977)
In this article, Justice Reynoso expresses his concerns about the United States Supreme Court's consideration of the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. More than a legal decision, Reynoso argued that the "most tragic result of the decision" was that it "helped estalish a negative feeling by minorities."
“The majority criticize[s]… that is permissible. We as appellate courts are free to criticize Supreme Court rulings. What we are not free to do is to refuse to follow those rulings.”
An excerpt from Cruz Reynoso's Dissenting Opinion on DeRonde v Regents of California (1980)
"Minority Lawyers, Legislators Hit DeRonde Ruling as Racist," Los Angeles Daily Journal (1980)
Sacramento Attorney Nathanial Colley was quoted as saying that the two justices who wrote the majority opinion of the DeRonde v Regents of California, “assume that they can tell minorities of America what pace we must travel to receive our just due," sentiments Cruz Reynoso touched on his dissenting opinion.
“King Hall, the University of California at Davis School of Law, from whence this lawsuit emanates, was named in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr., a black minister. Through the moral force of his character and faith he inspired America to seek after justice, and he shared with America his dream of a true and abiding equality among all racial, ethnic and linguistic groups who call this land their own. We have paid homage to his ideals by naming a law school in his honor. But we honor his dream with greater warmth when we march that added step or two, as did he, toward the mountain top of equality. King Hall took that step.”
An Excerpt from Cruz Reynoso's Dissenting Opinion on DeRonde v. Regents of California (1980)
Cruz Reynoso pulls on the legacy of King Hall, that of Martin Luther King Jr., a legacy of equality, morality and of justice. A legacy that lived and died to provide true equal opportunities. Justice Reynoso argues that King's legacy demands us to continue his work and to live up to the ideals embodied in the name that King Hall has adopted.
“Every individual has the fundamental right to be different in language and ethnicity, or race, and yet be treated with the dignity which due process and the equal protection of the law entails. But the right to be treated equally does not mean that treatment must be identical.”
An Excerpt from Justice Reynoso's Dissenting Opinion in DeRonde v. Regents of California (1980)
Cruz Reynoso shows how equal protection can still uphold the dignity of people of color and people of different backgrounds. Reynoso, during the appellate years, and his court were faced with the DeRonde v Regents of California case, which tested the decision of Bakke. Bakke challenged the University of California, Davis admission practices in King Hall, which took into consideration the race of applicants. DeRonde, a white man, argued that this practice was discriminatory and unequal. The majority of the appellate court, except Reynoso, agreed with DeRonde. However, Reynoso saw differently, arguing that the practices of UC Davis fit the decision of Bakke, furthermore emphasizing that considering race is not discriminatory, but instead seeing the whole of the student.
"Hispanics Demand Brown pick Reynoso," Source Unknown (c. 1981)
Governor Jerry Brown boasted about his appointment of minority candidates for state positions, the judiciary, and his administration. This article reveals the pressure Mexican-American and Latino groups wanted to exercise on the Governor to appoint Cruz Reynoso to the highest court in the state. At this point, a new vacancy was still uncertain, but groups like the Mexican American Political Association (MAPA) expressed their views early.
Mailgram for Richard Lopez to Justice Reynoso (1981)
Richard P Lopez, a worker in a construction company from Stockton, recommends Cruz Reynoso to Governor Jerry Brown. Reynoso was still serving on the appellate court, but Lopez wanted the Governor to know that Reynoso's honor was renowned throughout the state. Reynoso would go on to serve on the California State Supreme Court.
Letter from the San Benito Health Foundation (1981)
Alejo Hernandez was President of a health clinic who had worked with Cruz Reynoso before in protecting the rights of those who were impoverished. Hernandez writes a letter of support, citing Cruz Reynoso's efforts to protect undocumented individuals as well as the pickers, who Hernandez called, "the most exploited." He shows his continuous support for Reynoso's efforts.
Letter from George Paras to Cruz Reynoso (1981)
In 1982, Governor Jerry Brown nominated Reynoso to the California Supreme Court. In this letter, one of Reynoso's fellow justices on the Appellate Court writes a problematic letter, which refers to Reynoso as a "pain in the ass" and a "professional Mexican." In the interest of a full representation, this letter is displayed here in its entirety. Note, also, that this letter was sent on official letterhead.
Upon Reynoso's nomination, Paras sent this letter to the Commission on Judicial Appointments and brought it to public attention, registering his opposition.
"Crime Alert," Sacramento Bee (1982)
A political cartoon during Deukmejian's gubernatorial campaign for California, where he also demonized Cruz Reynoso for being soft on crime and anti-death penalty. While the claims were dubious, and at times even refuted, efforts from Deukmejian would cost Reynoso his retention vote for the state supreme court. Reynoso at this time had a large amount of support from Latin people in California, and efforts to demonize Reynoso risked alienating Latino voters.
Assignment from the Judicial Council of California (1982)
An assignment by Chief Justice Rose Bird for Cruz Reynoso, who still served on the 3rd District Court of Appeal. Cruz Reynoso would later join the Bird Court as an Associate Justice.
Letters of Support for Reynoso's Appointment to the California Supreme Court (1982)
Portrait of Justice Reynoso (1982)
In California, nominees for the state's highest court are nominated by the governor and evaluated by a three-person Commission on Judicial Appointments. The Commission includes the Supreme Court's Chief Justice, the Attorney General, and "the most senior Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal of the affected district." The Commission approved Reynoso’s nomination by a vote of 2-1 (then-Attorney General George Deukmejian was the lone vote against Reynoso's appointment). After approval by the Commission, Reynoso officially became the first Latino Associate Justice of the highest court in California. Despite the historic significance of Reynoso’s appointment, conservative Republicans wanted to wholly reshape the Court and hoped to replace the new Justice in the future.
Program from Justice Reynoso's Investiture Ceremony (1982)
“We have been placed on earth to serve our fellow human beings. A call to judge is a special labor, a balance of seeking after the ideal and the practical. The oath that we take to apply the law and constitution serves as the foundation for that service.”
"Courts were not established to respond to a popular majority vote."
Notes on Speech for the Fresno County Bar Association Luncheon (1982)
This statement written by Reynoso in his legal pad in preparation for a speech highlights his legacy, one that puts the law, and the equal protections it grants, above all pressures.
Community Service Organization 35th Anniversary Program (1982)
In 1982, the CSO honored Justice Reynoso on the 35th Anniversary. He gave remarks about the significance of his appointment and reflected on his participation in the El Centro chapter of the CSO.
Cruz Reynoso Doodle (1982)
Cruz Reynoso drew regularly on his documents, notes, and other materials. In one oral history, he discussed enjoying art and that he even considered becoming an artist.
Letter from the National Mexican American Correctional Association (1985)
A letter of support by the Mexican American Correctional Association, highlighting how they saw Cruz Reynoso as an ally to their organization before and in turn would ally Reynoso now as efforts to unseat him from the state Supreme court were intensifying.
"It was the California Supreme Court" Pamphlet (1986)
Sitting Justices are regularly put before the voters with the question of yes or no to keep them in their position. This is known as a retention election, in which justices do not face a challenger on the ballot, but can be voted out of office. In practice, these elections are generally quiet because candidates are rarely forced out of office. However, when justices are removed from office, the incumbent Governor can appoint their replacement. Thus, in 1986, conservative politicians saw an opportunity to challenge the Bird Court and to give Governor George Deukmejian an opportunity to replace three justices - Chief Justice Rose Bird, Justice Reynoso, and Justice Joseph Grodin - with more conservative judges. These conservatives politicized the retention election, which caused a stir among advocates of judicial independence, who wanted to keep politics out of the courts. In this pamphlet, the "Independent Citizens' Committee to Keep Politics out of the Court" emphasizes the importance of a "free and independent Court" to "rule for people over power."
"Cruz Reynoso: An American Story" Pamphlet (1986)
"Reynoso is Encouraged," Sacramento Bee (1986)
Justice Reynoso recognized the challenge of winning his retention election, but was optimistic that voters would resist the politicization of the courts. He refused to distance himself from the Chief Justice Rose Bird and maintained his distance from the political side of winning election. He wished to avoid politics to emphsaize his judicial independence. While this strategy was commendable, political consultants warned him that not reacting to the campaign could cost him the election.
Reynoso's Response to the General Election Results (1986)
Ultimately, voters firmly rejected an activist judicial philosophy embodied by the three perceived liberal justices: Chief Justice Bird, Justice Reynoso, and Justice Grodin. Despite an electoral setback, Reynoso continued to devote his life to causes that served others and demonstrated his commitment to education.
" We still do seem to have in this country, among many folk, the notion that somehow a white male can be fair to anybody, a woman, a minority, et cetera. But if you're a woman or you're minority then you may be prejudiced in favor of those folk "
-Cruz Reynoso
Martin, Michel. "Should Identity Matter on the Bench?" NPR. NPR, July 15, 2009. https://www.NPR.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106636900.
NPR interviewed Cruz Reynoso about the question of whether identity should matter on the bench during the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Reynoso pointed out the hypocrisy of critics who say that minorities are always biased, or will be inherently unfair in court cases, yet do not consider the biases of the judges that came before.