The California Supreme Court has declined to adopt a proposed rule change that would have allowed certain disciplinary records of attorneys to be expunged from public view after a period of time. The proposal, backed by the State Bar of California, aimed to remove or “hide” older discipline records in the interest of fairness and reducing racial disparities in the state’s attorney discipline system.
However, the state’s highest court unanimously rejected the initiative, effectively preserving full public access to the historical discipline records of lawyers admitted to practice in California. The decision, delivered without detailed explanation, leaves in place the current rules requiring permanent public display of disciplinary history on the State Bar’s website.
The Proposal: A Push for Privacy and Equity
The rejected plan would have allowed attorneys disciplined more than eight years ago to petition for the removal of those records from their online profiles—provided they had maintained a clean record since. The measure was intended to give second chances to attorneys who had demonstrated rehabilitation and professional growth after facing disciplinary action.
Under the proposal, the State Bar estimated that more than 2,300 attorneys could have qualified for expungement in its first year. The Bar emphasized that the rule would not have applied to disbarred attorneys or to those involved in serious misconduct involving fraud, moral turpitude, or client harm.
In addition to the expungement measure, the Bar had also proposed two other revisions: reducing the reinstatement fee for disbarred lawyers from $5,000 to $1,000 and eliminating a $2,500 fine for attorneys who had been suspended. Both measures were rejected by the Supreme Court alongside the expungement proposal.
Neither the State Bar nor the California Supreme Court issued a detailed comment explaining the rationale behind the court’s decision. Legal observers, however, note that the rejection aligns with the judiciary’s longstanding commitment to transparency and public accountability within the legal profession.
Background: Scrutiny Over the State Bar’s Oversight
The decision comes at a time when the State Bar of California remains under heightened scrutiny for its oversight of attorney discipline, following several high-profile scandals. The most notable of these involved Tom Girardi, a once-prominent Los Angeles trial attorney best known from the “Erin Brockovich” case.
Girardi was disbarred in 2023 after being accused of misappropriating millions of dollars in settlement funds intended for his clients. Investigations later revealed that the Bar had received more than 200 complaints about Girardi’s conduct over several decades, yet failed to act decisively.
That scandal prompted widespread criticism of the Bar’s disciplinary process, raising questions about whether it had been too lenient or inconsistent in enforcing ethical standards. In response, the Bar committed to reforming its disciplinary procedures and strengthening oversight mechanisms.
Against this backdrop, the proposed expungement plan appeared controversial. While intended to promote fairness, critics argued that it could undermine public confidence in the legal profession by allowing attorneys with past ethical breaches to effectively erase their records from public scrutiny.
Equity Concerns and Disciplinary Disparities
Proponents of the expungement measure argued that it was a step toward addressing racial disparities in attorney discipline. A 2019 State Bar–commissioned study found that Black male attorneys—who make up roughly 1% of California’s lawyer population—were more than three times as likely as white male attorneys to face probationary discipline.
Bar officials contended that allowing older, minor disciplinary records to be cleared after years of good standing would mitigate long-term career impacts that disproportionately affect attorneys of color. Supporters also argued that the proposal reflected the broader societal movement toward second chances and rehabilitation in professional and criminal justice systems alike.
Nevertheless, critics—including some legal ethics scholars and consumer advocates—warned that public access to disciplinary history is essential to maintaining trust in the legal system. “Transparency is not optional in a profession built on fiduciary duty,” one ethics expert noted. “Clients have a right to know whether their lawyer has a history of misconduct—no matter how long ago it occurred.”
A Balancing Act Between Rehabilitation and Public Trust
The California Supreme Court’s decision underscores the ongoing tension between protecting the reputations of rehabilitated professionals and ensuring full transparency for clients and the public.
California, home to more than 176,000 licensed attorneys, maintains one of the largest and most accessible public attorney databases in the nation. Each attorney’s profile includes a complete record of disciplinary actions, including suspensions, probations, and disbarments.
Legal professionals remain divided over whether permanent public discipline records serve justice or perpetuate inequities. Some argue that retaining all records, regardless of age or severity, can unfairly stigmatize lawyers for minor infractions committed early in their careers. Others maintain that erasing such records risks concealing patterns of misconduct and diminishing accountability.
Looking Ahead
With the Supreme Court’s decision, the State Bar’s current rules remain intact—disciplinary actions will continue to be visible indefinitely, and the proposed reductions in fines will not take effect.
The Bar is expected to revisit aspects of its attorney discipline system in light of the ruling. Discussions on equity, fairness, and transparency are likely to continue as the Bar seeks to balance its dual mission: protecting the public while ensuring fair treatment of the lawyers it regulates.
California’s legal community will now watch closely to see whether the court’s stance influences similar debates in other states. For now, the message is clear: in the nation’s largest legal market, accountability remains a permanent part of an attorney’s professional record.
Stay informed about the latest developments in the legal industry, attorney discipline, and professional ethics. Visit LawCrossing.com to explore legal jobs, news, and insights that shape your career in law.
