A court for all Oregon.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Every member of the Oregon Supreme Court is highly qualified - including Rives Kisler, appointed last week to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Susan Leeson. As a group, however, the seven justicies have some glaring deficiencies: They're all men, and they're all from the Portland-Salem part of the Willamette Valley.

Oregon is now one of only two states with no women on its Supreme Court (the other is Indiana). Leeson was only the third woman to serve on Oregon's highest court; the first was Betty Roberts, who was appointed in 1982.

The absence of a justice from outside the lower Willamette Valley shows that the informal but long-standing tradition of having someone from Eastern Oregon on the court has been abandoned. The lack of respect for this tradition is part of what led critics of the court to place Measure 22 on the ballot last November, an initiative requiring that appellate court justices be elected from geographic districts. Measure 22 was a bad idea, but it resonated with voters who see the courts as being dominated by urban interests. The initiative failed by a margin of only 1 percent.

No governor, including Ted Kulongoski, should set out to fill quotas when considering judicial appointments. Yet the character of the court as a whole must be considered when it's time to fill a vacancy. A court needs members with varied backgrounds and experiences, allowing the collective body to deal knowledgeably with the varied cases that come before it - cases brought by all types of people from all parts of the state.

Ensuring that the courts have the breadth and strength that comes from a diverse membership is the governor's responsibility. The path to the Oregon Supreme Court leads through the governor's office. Of the seven justices, only one - Paul de Muniz - was elected without having first been appointed by the governor.

When the next vacancy opens, Kulongoski should bear in mind that he's choosing not just an individual but a member of a group. The Supreme Court should have one or more women as members, and it should have one or more justices who are closely familiar with the problems of communities whose economies depend on natural resources. It should have members who have worked as trial court judges. The court needs the intellectual depth provided by members with an academic background, and the practicality that a career as a prosecutor or defense attorney can bring.

Diversity of all kinds - gender, geographical, career experience - not only strengthens the court, it reinforces public confidence in the court's decisions. The judicial branch of government, by design, is the branch that is most distant from the people, but the courts still need public support, and that support arises from people's sense that the courts speak for them. If a court more reflective of the general population is not achieved through gubernatorial appointments, Oregon may see another initiative imposing diversity by other means.