Today, bookpleasures.comis proud to engage with Janet Kintner, the author of  A Judge'sTale: A Trailblazer Fights for Her Place on the Bench. 

This inspiring memoircaptures Janet's remarkable journey as one of the first female triallawyers in the 1960s and 70s, and her significant role as the thirdfemale judge in San Diego and, notably, the youngest judge inCalifornia at just 31 years old.

Janet's background inFairborn, Ohio, and later in Tucson, Arizona, was shaped by earlyexperiences that included overcoming trauma. 

These formative momentssparked her lifelong commitment to justice, a central themethroughout her story.

Her narrative highlightsthe challenges women faced in a male-dominated legal system,including sexism and exclusion from professional opportunities. 

In the midst of ademanding 1978 judicial election campaign, Janet balanced theresponsibilities of being pregnant with her second child. 

This pivotal period testedher strength as she managed motherhood, full-time judicialresponsibilities, and a high-stakes campaign. Despite the hurdles,she demonstrated remarkable resilience and perseverance.

Beyond her courtroomachievements, Janet has emerged as a dedicated advocate for genderequality. Her involvement with organizations such as the Lawyers Cluband the National Association of Women Judges reflects her commitmentto promoting a more equitable legal landscape. 

Moreover, Janet'scontributions to legal scholarship and her mentorship of fellowjudges emphasize her desire to uplift those around her. 

She alsoactively champions causes, such as improving the lives of individualsaffected by type 1 diabetes, further demonstrating her dedication tomaking a positive impact.

Norm: Good day, Janet, andthank you for joining us for this insightful discussion.

Your memoir begins duringa crucial judicial election campaign while you were pregnant. How didthat experience influence your storytelling? Was the process ofrevisiting such an intense period both personally and professionallychallenging?

Photo by Jennifer Anderson

Janet: Being pregnant wasfront and center for me during my election campaign, literally aswell as metaphorically. It was 1978, and I had to make constantin-person campaign appearances. 

There was no internet, so that's howwe did it then. I was obviously seven months pregnant when the overfive-month-long campaign started, so people noticed it immediately. 

Many people commented on my pregnancy, including one male opponent.Almost all the candidates in that year's election were men, and Inever saw another pregnant woman during the entire campaign. Idefinitely stood out and felt different.

Writing the story waseasy. That was a part of my life that I remembered well. It was anintense and pivotal time because I was fighting to keep my job whilecarrying my second child. 

The words just flowed. But in recalling anddescribing that time, I remembered the extreme stress I felt. It wasimportant not to lose the election and to have a healthy baby.

Many friends thought Ishould downplay the fact that I was a woman because there were veryfew women in business, government, law enforcement, and the courtsthen. 

Fewer than 5% of judges were women. But it's impossible todownplay the fact that I'm a woman when I'm so obviously pregnant.And while my pregnancy made my campaign more difficult by allaccounts, 

I felt wonderful to be carrying this healthy child insideme that we wanted so much. So being pregnant was a wonderful thing —except for the campaign.

 I worried that the stress I was sufferingfrom the campaign would harm my baby, especially after my doctorwarned me to avoid stress. That made me feel guilty, but I wouldn'tgive up either the election or my baby. 

Writing about this time waspersonally difficult and emotional for several reasons. When I wroteit, all these feelings came back. 

Norm: You candidly addresstraumatic experiences from your early life, including sexual assault.How did sharing these events affect you during the writing process,and how do you believe they shaped your passion for justice?

Janet: It was challengingto write about some of these events because they are so personal andterrifying, but I heard many similar stories when I was a judge. Iknew my story was not unique. 

Things like that have happened to manywonderful people who suffered terribly. By telling my story, otherswill feel less alone, better understood, and know it is not theirfault. I felt compelled to include these events in my book. 

Being a victim of sexualassault, especially where I did not receive justice, enormouslymotivated me to become a lawyer and try to help others who have beenvictims of crime to obtain justice. 

That was huge in my life. It didshape my passion for justice.

Norm: The legalenvironment of the 1960s and 70s was predominantly male-dominated andfrequently challenging for women. How did you navigate issues ofsexism and condescension during law school and your early career? 

Were there pivotal moments or mentors who helped you overcome theseobstacles? 

Janet: I tried to workwith the people who were running legal institutions. I got along withmany men in law school, including some professors and theadministration. As a lawyer, I worked well with many of the men whowere leaders of the legal community and the courts. 

Usually, theyounger men had an easier time accepting women. Other women lawyersof the time were much like me. We were trying to work with them fromwithin to change the institutions so they would accept women. 

I triedto point out sexism in a humorous way and get them to change, andthat often worked. Many of the men were open to us and were willingto accept us once they got to know us and what we had to offer. 

Othermen were more difficult, and sometimes I argued openly with them.Sometimes it was hopeless, and it was apparent they would neverchange. They retired and died without ever accepting women as equals. 

I remember the first female judge in my county (whom I knew) hadgiven up trying to be treated equally many times in the 1950s and'60s and said, "That was just the way it was." Sometimes wejust had to give it more time for things to change. 

Talking with other femalelawyers and judges was extremely important. We gave each other moralsupport and ideas for coping with challenges. 

That is why we formedgroups like the Lawyers Club of San Diego, California Women Lawyers,the National Association of Women Judges, and the InternationalAssociation of Women Judges.

Norm: You gained thenickname "the topless prosecutor" following your success inconsumer fraud cases. How did you cultivate your prosecutorial styleand reputation, and do you think this nickname was beneficial ordetrimental to your career?

Janet: Nobody heard aboutthe name "the topless prosecutor" except the two excellent,prominent daily newspaper reporters who gave me that name and me.They were being funny when they quietly told me that in thecourthouse hall. 

They were the primary source of my reputation andfame because they wrote about almost all of my consumer fraud cases.Other journalists also wrote about my cases and speeches. 

Still,these two, who were assigned to the courthouse, had followed me moreclosely than any of the others ever since I first became a lawyer. Inthat era, newspapers were the primary source of news, especially forcourt cases. 

Consumer fraud was mypassion as a lawyer. I loved helping protect victims of scams, whichfinancially ruined many people. I worked very hard, filed manymeritorious cases, and never lost a consumer fraud case. That builtmy reputation. 

Norm: Governor Jerry Brownappointed you as a judge while you were seven months pregnant, whichwas quite rare. How did you manage being a young, pregnant judgealongside the pressures of your responsibilities? 

Did you encounterspecific challenges in the courtroom or with your colleagues relatedto this?

Janet: One of the greatthings about being a judge is you wear a big, billowing black robethat makes it difficult to be certain if a judge is pregnant or notuntil the very end. So, many people who only saw me in my courtroomwere unaware that I was pregnant. 

For some lawyers, the last timethey saw me before my appointment, I was pregnant, and they seemed tokeep thinking of me as being pregnant. Even more than nine monthslater.  

 I didn't know of anyother pregnant women judges at that time, and there were very fewwomen judges at all. So I was definitely different. The difficultywas that some men were offended that I, a young, pregnant woman, hadbeen appointed instead of them. 

They were used to men beingappointed, and some didn't like the change. And some didn't like thegovernor's political party, which appointed me. So some people werebothered by it. But I just did my job. 

My pregnancy didn't interferewith that. I was always able to work, and I enjoyed feeling my babymoving around inside me. The older male judges didn't talk about mypregnancy. It was simply not a topic of conversation. 

Norm: The 1978 electioncampaign was marked by aggressive attacks from opponents and even asmear campaign. How did you stay true to your values and maintainfocus during such a tumultuous time? 

What insights about campaigningand public perception would you share with women aspiring to run foroffice today?

Janet: I knewinstinctively not to personally attack my major opponent, like he wasdoing to me. I had an obligation as a judge to be ethical and abovethe fray. A judicial temperament requires me to be calm, fair, andtell the truth. 

He accused me of things I didn't do, and he lied. Ihad to make that clear. He sounded desperate. Still, it waschallenging to repeatedly defend myself against journalists whocalled to share their latest accusations. I just took one day at atime. 

When I made my manypersonal appearances and gave speeches, people wanted to see forthemselves that I had what it took to be a strong, competent, andfair judge. They tried to ask questions and learn more about me. Iwas myself. 

They turned into my best supporters. 

We need to emphasize ourstrengths, and when the voters get to know us, we should do well.Although a woman has never been elected president, on other levels,including judicial elections, women have won many times since myelection. 

Women have proven themselves to be as competent andqualified as men —to serve as judges as well as hold other electedpositions. It is noble to dedicate ourselves to a life of publicservice and improving the lives of others, and when the publicunderstands that, they will support us.  

Norm: You wrote about thedelicate balance between full-time judicial duties and motherhoodduring your pregnancy. How did you navigate these competing demands,both emotionally and practically? 

What advice would you offer toworking mothers in high-pressure careers today?

Janet: I constantlystruggled over the balance between the two. When I was working, Ifelt guilty for not being with my kids. And sometimes, when I waswith my kids, I felt guilty for not working, even though I had a lotof research to do to prepare for the next day of work. 

But I set upguidelines and stuck to them. That meant that, after work and beforemy children went to bed, I spent my time totally focused on my kids.I did the research and reading from work after my children went tobed. 

I had to do my job and focus entirely on it while I was working.The parties deserved nothing less than my total attention.

Emotionally, it wasn'teasy to maintain that balance. I sometimes suffered horribly.Sometimes, I had guilt that oozed out of my pores and threatened tosuffocate me. But it was worth it to have a family. 

My children havebrought and continue to bring me great joy, like they will when weall get together at my house this Christmas. 

Some flexibility inmy schedule was essential. There were times when I had to be with mychildren, for example, to deal with health problems that my sittercouldn't handle. Those were rare, but they happened, and I needed anunderstanding supervisor as we all do. 

There were times I had to worklate, and those more than made up for the times I had to leave early.It really helps to have supervisors who are understanding andflexible when those rare times occur. 

Our supervisor was thePresiding Judge. So, if you have a choice, try to get—and be-- thatkind of supervisor. When we work hard and take on any job we areasked to do, I find supervisors are usually more willing to work withus. 

Also, when choosing apartner, look for someone who will help you take care of yourchildren. That takes a lot of pressure off you and reduces the guilt.I would have loved to have that, but fifty years ago, I didn't haveit. 

Norm: You became theyoungest judge in California at age 31. How did your age, inconjunction with your gender, shape the challenges you faced? Did youfeel increased pressure to prove yourself because of your youth?

Janet: Being an obviouslypregnant young woman when I was appointed made it more challengingbecause of how some people felt about gender, youth, and pregnancy. 

It would have been easier if I were not so young. Still, other womenlawyers and I felt very strongly that we needed more women judges,and that is why I agreed to submit my name. 

There was only one otherfemale judge (and about a hundred male judges) in the whole countywhen I did. Women lawyers, including me, had stories of beingdisrespected by some judges. 

I did feel an increasedpressure to prove myself as a judge, both because of my youth and mygender. I felt like I had to be perfect, which is impossible. That isa familiar feeling among women breaking into a male-dominated field. 

Norm: Perseverance is arecurring theme in your memoir. Can you identify a moment when youconsidered giving up? What motivated you to keep going during thosedifficult times?

Janet: One time, my onlytypewriter broke in the middle of the three-day Arizona Bar Exam,which was timed and strictly monitored. I had paid a considerableprice to take that exam, and nobody could read my writing. 

Iconsidered giving up. But then I thought, no, I don't give up. Idon't even know what that would look like, so I beganproblem-solving. How I did it is in my book. 

Another time was whendozens of employers in San Diego refused to hire me or any otherfemale lawyer in 1968. Just because we were women, and they told usthat. But I figured this was my dream, my goal. 

Somebody somewhereeventually would hire me. I kept asking everybody I could find aboutjobs. I wouldn't give up. And I eventually got a job I loved. I thinkit was something about me—and other people like me. 

I have alwaysbeen determined, whether for my clients or for me when I was alawyer. And it has paid off. 

Norm: Your memoireffectively contrasts your ethical approach with the unethicaltactics used by your opponents, offering reassurance about theintegrity of the legal system. 

Throughout your career, have youwitnessed changes in ethical standards within the judiciary?

Janet:  I was amember of our California Judges Association Judicial Ethics Committeebeginning in 1985, so I was very much aware of our standards ofethics in California. 

Our committee answered judges' inquiries aboutwhat constituted a violation of the ethics rules. 

It was amazing howmany issues arose, such as whether certain words or conduct byjudges, both inside and outside the courtroom, would violate the rulerequiring judges to be, and appear to be, fair and impartial. 

Also,there were issues over when judges should disqualify themselves andwhen there is a conflict of interest. I have seen a few ethicschanges, but they have been minor in California. 

For example, theCalifornia Ethics rules were changed after I ran to allow judges tooppose and endorse candidates for judicial positions. However, judgesstill cannot endorse for non-judicial positions.

The most significantethics change I have witnessed is the US Supreme Court, which had nowritten ethics rules before, finally adopting some in 2023 after newsarticles about US Supreme Court justices accepting gifts and doingthings that most state court judges can't. 

However, at the time ofthis writing, there is still no enforcement mechanism in place. Thisis in contrast to all the states that have had written rules ofethics, many modelled after the American Bar Association's Model Codeof Judicial Conduct, and that have enforcement bodies to enforcetheir ethical rules. 

Norm: How did yourpersonal relationships, particularly with your first husband, Chuck,shape your career and help you cope with the pressures of yourprofession? In hindsight, what role does partnership play insupporting women's advancement in traditionally male-dominatedfields?

Janet: It is essential tohave the support of someone close to you, like a spouse or partner,or a really good friend. Since I started practicing law, I have knownChuck supported my career, even though he was often away. 

Chuckworked about an hour and a half away, in another county, and he wasgone all weekdays, including evenings and many times all night. So Ioften was alone, but when I had my election, Chuck stepped up and didwhat I needed. 

When women are bucking thestatus quo and trying to break into a field dominated by men, as Iwas, we need support. It doesn't have to be a spouse, and much of mysupport came from friends and family. 

But when I had my election in1978, the biggest challenge of my career, fortunately for me, I hadChuck to help. And he gave the campaign the high priority it needed.I didn't have anyone else willing or able to do that. 

As I explainedin my book, Chuck played a massive role in my campaign; mostimportantly, he helped with the finances and was in charge of theradio ads, our primary tool for getting our message out. 

I knew Icould rely on him to get the job done. I cannot imagine trying to dothat alone, mainly because my election was an unusually nasty andtime-consuming one, and I worked full-time and gave birth to mysecond child in the middle of the campaign. 

Throughout my career as alawyer, I needed help, and I got it from more experienced lawyers.They all generously gave of their time to help me learn how to be agood lawyer, and I did the same for others. 

But my need for help withmy career pales in comparison to my need for help once I hadchildren. I was a judge then. It was clear that I could not have mychildren with me at work. 

So when I was working and campaigning, Ineeded someone to look after my children. And not just anyone; Ineeded someone good with children and trustworthy. All workingmothers go through this. 

Whenever I lost my babysitter, which wasusually every year or two, my life came to a screeching halt, and Ihad to find a replacement. That was often the most challenging thingI had to do. 

I could find no good agencies to help and no reliableday care centers for little ones then. I had to place ads in thenewspaper in that pre-Internet era and provide my home phone number. 

My answering machine recorded their information. I interviewed andchecked references. It was time-consuming and frustrating, but itworked.

Chuck took care of ourchildren many nights during my six-month-long campaign when I wasgiving speeches. After that, he came home to stay with our childrenonce a month while I was at my bridge group, but aside from that, Iwas in charge of childcare. 

Chuck always left all of the childcarearrangements and medical care for our children up to me. He did nottake them to school, the doctor, or help find a sitter. I did all ofthat. It was traditional, and the way it had been done before womenworked outside the home. 

But I sure would have appreciated more help.My two sons have grown up to be much more helpful with theirchildren, and I'm proud of them for that. 

Norm: Where can ourreaders find more information about you and your memoir,  A Judge'sTale: A Trailblazer Fights for Her Place on the Bench?

Janet: My Website   

A Judge's Tale | Book byJanet Kintner | Official Publisher Page | Simon & Schuster 

Instagram.com

Substack

Norm: As we conclude ourdiscussion, now that you are living between Southern California andCanada in your retirement years, what key message do you hoperesonates with today's readers, particularly young women pursuing acareer in law? 

Are you considering any future projects?

Janet: For young women,figure out what your passion is. Some of my friends who went into lawwanted to make a lot of money and did. But I wanted to help people,especially those who needed help and couldn't afford regular lawyers'fees.  

I was able to do that through Legal Aid in San Diego,which helps low-income people in civil cases; as a prosecutor; and inprivate practice, where I never turned down a valid case, even ifpeople couldn't afford to pay me. 

By writing my book, Iwanted to share how important it is for women to be in positions ofpower. When I was a victim of crime in the 1960s, there werepractically no women in the police department, the prosecutors'office, or the courts. 

Men were making all the decisions, and I'msure many women were not being protected, just like I wasn't. Wecannot become complacent about women being in positions of power.There are groups in the United States opposed to that. 

We mustunderstand how important this is and ensure women maintain a seat atthe table where decisions about justice are made. 

For future projects,I plan to write either a humorous work of fiction or a sequel aboutmy life after 1978. Or both. 

The nice thing about writing is I cancarry my laptop back and forth between Canada and the US and writewherever I am. Regardless of where I am, I want to give my readersjoy, inspiration, and a feeling of connectedness.  

Norm: Thanks once again and good luck with all of your future endeavors