“A bench that mirrors the city’s diversity is not just more representative—it is better equipped to deliver justice that is fair, credible, and trusted.”
New York City’s courts shape millions of lives, yet one gap remains stark: Black men are dramatically underrepresented on the bench. Despite the city’s growing diversity, political and judicial leadership has not kept pace, leaving too few Black male judges in positions of influence.
Demographics have long shaped city politics. In the 1970s and 1980s, rising engagement by Black and Hispanic voters reshaped the landscape. By the 1990s, minority candidates—many women—gained ground in the City Council, State Legislature, Congress, and county leadership in the Bronx, Brooklyn, and Manhattan.
The judiciary followed a similar path. Early waves of elected minority judges often included Black men who had practiced law in their own communities and were well known to local voters and elected officials. As the legal profession diversified, women—long the backbone of minority voting communities—advanced steadily. More Black women began winning Civil Court judgeships with strong support from Democratic county leadership. This was, and remains, a positive and important development for communities of color.
Yet this progress has produced an unintended consequence. As more women excelled in the pipeline, identifying and elevating qualified Black men to the bench has become increasingly difficult. New York State’s Office of Court Administration publishes an annual self-reported judicial demographics report reflecting participation by roughly 76 percent of eligible jurists. In the city’s elected Civil Court, about 22 percent of judges are Black; in Supreme Court, just 19 percent. Appointed courts show similar disparities: roughly 15 percent of criminal court judges and 23 percent of Family Court judges are Black. Including men and women, Black male judges are an even smaller share, reflecting a narrowing pipeline despite qualified candidates.
Nowhere is this imbalance more consequential than in criminal court. NYPD arrest data and New York City Criminal Justice Agency reports show roughly 49 percent of arrests are Black, with Black men making up the overwhelming majority. Black men thus constitute a substantial—often the plurality—of defendants, even as their chances of appearing before a Black male judge remain exceedingly low.
Representation matters not because judges should decide cases based on identity, but because courts depend on legitimacy and public trust. For many Black male defendants, the system has long felt distant or unresponsive. Seeing Black men on the bench strengthens confidence that courts understand defendants as individuals and can administer justice with rigor and humanity. That trust reinforces respect for court outcomes and compliance with judicial decisions.
Judges must follow the law, but within it, judicial discretion matters—especially in criminal court, where decisions on bail, sentencing, and alternatives to confinement can shape a person’s life. Black male judges, informed by both professional training and lived experience, may be especially attuned to when a defendant is a strong candid][ate for rehabilitation rather than jail. This is not a call for favoritism, but for the thoughtful use of discretion to promote public safety while reducing unnecessary incarceration.
Remarkably, more Black judges—of any gender—build trust not only between Black defendants and the courts but also influence white judges. Their relationships with Black colleagues deepen understanding of Black defendants’ circumstances and encourage more thoughtful discretion. That influence, in turn, can strengthen Black defendants’ trust—not just in the Black judges they encounter, but in their white colleagues and the court system as a whole.
A 2023 study in the American Political Science Review found that as Black judges serve in greater numbers, white judges are less likely to impose custodial sentences on Black defendants, narrowing racial disparities by up to 7 percentage points. A 2022 Journal of Criminal Justice study found similar patterns, with lower confinement rates in jurisdictions with more Black judicial representation. In short, greater diversity on the bench reshapes judicial discretion and reduces reliance on incarceration.
The path forward is clear. To build a more representative bench, promising Black male candidates—whether from district attorney offices, public defender organizations, the courts, or community-based legal institutions—must be identified, mentored, and supported through transparent election and appointment processes.
That work should begin early, with law schools re-emphasizing criminal law, practice and procedure, and expanding access to public-sector training increasingly constrained by economic pressures—cultivating a pipeline that strengthens judicial decision-making and better reflects the communities it serves. Local Democratic and Republican Party organizations, bar associations, judicial nonprofits, justice centers, and judicial screening committees also play a critical role in providing these candidates the guidance, resources, and opportunities they need to succeed.
New York City has proven its institutions can evolve to reflect the people they serve. By intentionally cultivating the next generation of Black male judges, the city can build on decades of progress, restore confidence in the courts, and strengthen justice. A bench that mirrors the city’s diversity is not just more representative—it is better equipped to deliver justice that is fair, credible, and trusted.
Arthur Greig, Esq. is a Manhattan-based election lawyer and former counsel to the New York County Democratic Party. Michael Oliva is a public relations consultant who has specialized in New York City judicial elections.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
