It shall not be grounds for disqualification that the judge:
§ 170.2.Grounds not allowed for disqualification
Title 2. Judicial Officers · Chapter 3. Disqualifications of Judges · Enacted 1984 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 28, 2026
In one sentenceSection 170.2 lists three things that do not by themselves disqualify a California judge: membership in a group whose rights are at issue, having expressed a view on a legal or factual question, and past work drafting or lobbying on a law now at issue.
Full Text of § 170.2
(a) Is or is not a member of a racial, ethnic, religious, sexual or similar group and the proceeding involves the rights of such a group.
(c) Has as a lawyer or public official participated in the drafting of laws or in the effort to pass or defeat laws, the meaning, effect or application of which is in issue in the proceeding unless the judge believes that his or her prior involvement was so well known as to raise a reasonable doubt in the public mind as to his or her capacity to be impartial.
Plain-English Summary
§ 170.1 lists the grounds that disqualify a judge. § 170.2 is its counterpart: a short list of things that, standing alone, do not.
A judge who belongs to a racial, ethnic, religious, or similar group is not disqualified from a case touching that group’s rights merely by that membership, and the same goes for not belonging to the group. A judge who has expressed a view on a legal or factual issue in the past is not automatically barred from a case raising the same issue, except where § 170.1(a)(2) or (a)(6) says otherwise. And a judge who once worked as a lawyer or public official on drafting, passing, or defeating a law is not disqualified from a case about that law’s meaning — unless the judge’s earlier involvement was well known enough to raise a reasonable doubt about impartiality in the public mind.
The section keeps the disqualification grounds in § 170.1 from swallowing ordinary judicial experience. Judges come to the bench with backgrounds, opinions, and prior public service; § 170.2 confirms that having a background is not the same as having a conflict.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a judge disqualified from a case involving a group the judge belongs to?
No. § 170.2(a) says membership — or non-membership — in a racial, ethnic, religious, sexual, or similar group is not by itself grounds for disqualification, even when the case involves that group’s rights.
Can a judge hear a case after publicly commenting on the same legal issue?
Usually, yes. § 170.2(b) says having expressed a view on a legal or factual issue is not disqualifying on its own, though it carves out exceptions tied to § 170.1(a)(2) and (a)(6).
Does prior work on a bill disqualify a judge from a case about that law?
Not automatically. § 170.2(c) excuses this unless the judge’s earlier role was so well known that it would raise a reasonable doubt about impartiality in the public mind.
Amendment History
Added Stats 1984 ch 1555 § 6.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the Deering's California Codes Annotated / vLex. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 28, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: 170.2 not grounds for disqualificationjudge’s prior opinion not grounds to disqualify californiajudge drafted the law disqualification californiawhat doesn’t disqualify a california judge