Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Donna Ryu
2010 - Present
2026
15
Donna M. Ryu is a federal magistrate judge for the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. She has served in this position since March 1, 2010.[1]
Education
Ryu earned her B.A. from Yale University in 1982, where she graduated with honors. She received her J.D. from the University of California at Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law in 1986. While at Berkeley, she founded the Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law and Justice.[1]
Professional Career
Ryu started her legal career as an Associate at McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen in San Francisco, CA. She stayed there until 1988, before becoming an Associate at Saperstein, Seligman, Mayeda & Larkin in Oakland, CA until 1992. After leaving that firm, she worked as a sole practitioner, until founding Ryu, Dickey & Larkin in Oakland, CA in 1994. In 1998, she became an Associate Professor and Associate Director of the Women's Employment Rights Clinic at the Golden Gate University Law School. In 2002, she left Golden Gate University to become a Clinical Professor of Law at the University of California, Hastings. She remained there until her 2010 judicial appointment.[1]
Noteworthy cases
California fishing license fees ruled unconstitutional (2013)
- See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Marilley v. Bonham, 4:11-cv-02418-DMR)
- See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Marilley v. Bonham, 4:11-cv-02418-DMR)
On October 16, 2013, Judge Ryu ruled that California's fishing license fee was unconstitutional due to its tendency to favor in-state applicants over out-of-state applicants. In the underlying case, out-of-state commercial fisherman filed suit over the fee differential charged for their commercial fishing licenses and vessel registration, costs that were usually to two to three times more expensive simply by virtue of the fact that they were not California residents. The fishermen alleged that the difference in pricing infringed upon their right to equal protection and their right to the same privileges and immunities as citizens of another state. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment (i.e., a judgment in their favor without a full trial). Defendant Charlton Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Game, claimed that by charging nonresidents more money, the state was simply "recouping [its] fair share" of what was being used by citizens hailing from other states. Judge Ryu did not agree, and instead found that California was offering an unfair business advantage to its own residents. Judge Ryu denied Bonham's motion for summary judgment, and granted that of the fishermen, declaring the licensing fee structure unconstitutional.[2]
See also
- United States District Court for the Northern District of California
- United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit
External links
Footnotes
Federal courts:
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Central District of California, Eastern District of California, Northern District of California, Southern District of California • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Central District of California, Eastern District of California, Northern District of California, Southern District of California
State courts:
California Supreme Court • California Courts of Appeal • California Superior Courts
State resources:
Courts in California • California judicial elections • Judicial selection in California
