[blindlaw] Home-grown judicial information system possible barrier to judgeship pro tem

[Elizabeth Rene]

Hi folks,
What do you think of this?
I interviewed May 24 for the position of Judge pro tempore in the Seattle Municipal Court. I came as prepared as I could be to discuss how I might interact with the existing judicial information system as an intermittent, on-call presider, realizing the potential accommodation issues, should they arise, would be different were I to have been elected as a sitting judge.
I came with excellent references and a solid resume, and the interview went as I expected it would in all other respects. The panel was forthright in asking me questions about how I would interact with their in-house-designed judicial information system, which every judge used in all proceedings. I mentioned that I had access to blind judges across the country, and that I would have contacted them but for intensive litigation I was involved in earlier in the month. They responded that the construction of their system was proprietary information and that those judges wouldn’t have been able to anticipate that anyway. One judge, a former hospital administrator, spoke of how her hospital had installed a new medical information system that could not be used by their blind employees, and that these employees had had to be let go. When asked how I thought I might use their system, I suggested that my iPad had everything I would need for accessibility if I could use it to tap into their system for purposes of presiding. They told me that their IT specialist would contact me to discuss whether this was feasible.
In my thank you letter to the panel, I let them know that Apple’s accessibility team had expressed a commitment to help sync my iPad to the SMC network, and that they had prior experience of working with blind people and secure information systems. I offered to speak with any IT specialist they had to see what the possibilities might be. A human resources officer replied to my email saying that my suggestion was premature and that I would be contacted, after all reference and background checks had been made, if I were deemed qualified for the spot. I haven’t heard anything since from the SMC, though my references have written to me to say they had sent in their comments. All of these lawyers, and a former SMC judge I’d regularly prosecuted before, gave me glowing reviews.
This is not a request for legal advice. But I wonder what you all think about the idea of tackling a potential technological barrier to performance in the initial interview. Wouldn’t that have been more appropriate once an initial decision had been made that I was otherwise qualified and should be considered for an offer? My concern is that until the accessibility issue is decided, no blind jurist can sit on the Seattle Municipal Court bench regardless of merit. Right now I don’t know whether they found a better lawyer to hire or whether I have been eliminated because of the accessibility issue.
Thoughts? I’m going to ask my references what they think too.
Thanks,
Elizabeth


Elizabeth M René 
Attorney at Law 
WSBA #10710 
KCBA #21824
rene0373 at gmail.com