Explaining Judicial Diversity: The Differential Ability of Women and Minorities to Attain Seats on State Supreme and Appellate Courts

Abstract

Representation in political institutions, including the judiciary, is an important consideration for both political scientists and citizens. What factors systematically influence diversity among judges? In particular, does the method of selection affect the relative success of political minorities in attaining a seat on the bench? The answers to these questions have substantial normative and theoretical implications. We examine judges on all state supreme and intermediate appellate courts in 1985 and 1999 to assess the influence of various structural, political, and demographic factors on judicial diversity. We demonstrate that the ability of political minorities to attain a place in the judiciary is not solely a function of any single factor. Instead, their success is influenced by a multifaceted combination of factors contingent on time and the level of the court, and these influences differ for women and for minorities.

Her Ladyship Chief Justice: The Rise of Female Leaders in the Judiciary in Africa

“…Our preliminary finding fits with what scholars of judicial politics in the United States have found: the chances that a woman will become a high court judge do not seem to depend on whether judges are elected or whether judges are appointed (Alozie 1990;Bratton and Spill 2002;Frederick and Streb 2008;Click and Emmert 1987;Hurwitz and Lanier 2003;Martin and Pyle 2002;Williams 2007). Comparative studies of women's presence on high courts are more mixed, with some finding that judicial elections may favor women and minorities (Driscoll and Nelson 2015) and others finding that high courts are likelier to have more women if appointment is centralized in the presidency (Valdini and Shortell 2014;Williams and Thames 2008).…”

Integrating Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues into the Undergraduate Criminal Justice Curriculum

“…These data may be incorporated into an interactive lecture, in which the instructor provides students with demographics of the United States population and asks students to speculate about how those proportions match those of judges on the bench. Debate can follow on the merits of various methods of judicial appointment (e.g., Hurwitz and Lanier 2003) and the impact of diversity among judges (e.g., Beiner 1999) When teaching about victim impact statements (VIS), one author routinely reads aloud to his class the one delivered by Dennis Shepard, father of Matthew Shepard, at the trial of Matthew's murderers (see Loffreda 2000). The emotions Shepard's VIS evokes has never failed to provide a "teachable moment."…”

Linking Judicial Selection to Consensus

“…The importance of the state political environment has been noted in studies of elections (Dubois, 1980;Hall, 2001;Hall & Bonneau, 2006). State context is found to play a particularly important role in the selection of state judges (Bratton & Spill, 2002;Hurwitz & Lanier, 2003). Accordingly, ideological polarization within state courts is likely influenced by the state's ideological context.…”

“…Research further demonstrates that state methods of judicial selection affect the character of judges present within state courts (Bratton & Spill, 2002;Bonneau & Hall, 2003;Hall & Bonneau, 2006;Hurwitz & Lanier, 2003). Although critics of judicial elections argue that voters are largely incapable of ascertaining differences among judicial candidates (American Bar Association Commission on the 21st Century Judiciary, 2003), recent findings suggest otherwise.…”