Recently, The New York Times carried an article describing a chambers rule adopted by Senior U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the Eastern District of New York, which was described as urging greater utilization of female lawyers in leading roles at trials and other proceedings. The Times article referred to an interview that occurred with Judge Weinstein in which he is said to have acknowledged that he adopted the rule after reading a New York State Bar Association report, which found that female lawyers appear in court far less frequently than their male counterparts.

After reading the Times article, we obtained a copy of the chambers rule. It reads, in part, as follows: “Junior members of legal teams representing clients are invited to argue motions they have helped prepare and to question witnesses with whom they have worked. Opportunities to train young attorneys in oral advocacy are rare because of the decline of trials. Where junior lawyers are familiar with the matter under consideration, but have little experience arguing before a court, they should be encouraged to speak by the presiding judge and the law firms involved in the case. This court is amenable to permitting a number of lawyers to argue for one party if this creates an opportunity for a junior lawyer to participate. The ultimate decision of who speaks on behalf of the client is for the lawyer in charge of the case, not for the court.”

Examination of the rule shows that it does not mention female or minority lawyers. Rather, it speaks of “junior members of legal teams” and encourages law firms to make greater use of these individuals in proceedings before the court. The rule indicates that more than one junior lawyer could argue for one party (contrary to the usual custom in which only one lawyer gets to argue for a party) but points out that the decision of who will speak before the court will be that of the lawyer in charge of the case.

We commend Judge Weinstein for being innovative in addressing a situation that apparently needs attention. Although his rule does not refer specifically to female or minority lawyers, the changing demographics of the bar mean that more responsibility in the courtroom for junior lawyers will inevitably benefit women and minority lawyers. We hope that other judges may follow similar paths.

Recently, The New York Times carried an article describing a chambers rule adopted by Senior U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the Eastern District of New York, which was described as urging greater utilization of female lawyers in leading roles at trials and other proceedings. The Times article referred to an interview that occurred with Judge Weinstein in which he is said to have acknowledged that he adopted the rule after reading a New York State Bar Association report, which found that female lawyers appear in court far less frequently than their male counterparts.

After reading the Times article, we obtained a copy of the chambers rule. It reads, in part, as follows: “Junior members of legal teams representing clients are invited to argue motions they have helped prepare and to question witnesses with whom they have worked. Opportunities to train young attorneys in oral advocacy are rare because of the decline of trials. Where junior lawyers are familiar with the matter under consideration, but have little experience arguing before a court, they should be encouraged to speak by the presiding judge and the law firms involved in the case. This court is amenable to permitting a number of lawyers to argue for one party if this creates an opportunity for a junior lawyer to participate. The ultimate decision of who speaks on behalf of the client is for the lawyer in charge of the case, not for the court.”

Examination of the rule shows that it does not mention female or minority lawyers. Rather, it speaks of “junior members of legal teams” and encourages law firms to make greater use of these individuals in proceedings before the court. The rule indicates that more than one junior lawyer could argue for one party (contrary to the usual custom in which only one lawyer gets to argue for a party) but points out that the decision of who will speak before the court will be that of the lawyer in charge of the case.

We commend Judge Weinstein for being innovative in addressing a situation that apparently needs attention. Although his rule does not refer specifically to female or minority lawyers, the changing demographics of the bar mean that more responsibility in the courtroom for junior lawyers will inevitably benefit women and minority lawyers. We hope that other judges may follow similar paths.