The Consequences of Diversifying the US District Courts: Race, Gender, and Ideological Alignment through Judicial Appointments

Hofer, Scott J.; Achury, Susan

doi:10.1080/0098261x.2022.2026264

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We are aware of only one paper that connects case outcomes to the federal judicial appointment process. Hofer and Achury (2022) theorize that the effort to appoint racial minorities comes at a cost to appointing ideologically-aligned judges due to factors that make it more difficult for the selectors to predict the ideological alignment of judges from minority backgrounds. This literature leaves opportunities on the table.…”

Section: Race and Gender In Judgingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trading Diversity? Judicial Diversity and Case Outcomes in Federal Courts

Copus¹,

Hübert²,

Pellaton³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does racial and gender diversity on the federal judicial bench affect legal outcomes? Prior studies do not provide a clear answer, in part because they focus on how judges from different backgrounds---after controlling for other judicial characteristics---decide cases differently. In this article, we ask a simpler, but vital, question: do presidents' more diverse appointees, taken as they are, resolve cases differently than those presidents' other appointees? Using an original dataset of around 100,000 civil rights cases filed in 12 federal district courts, we find that the assignment of a case to a judge who is non-White or a woman has no statistically significant effect on case outcomes among Democratic appointees but causes more pro-defendant outcomes among Republican appointees. Our results are consistent with a theory of bargaining over judicial appointments in which Republican presidents take advantage of Democrats' concern over diversity on the bench to appoint more conservative judges.

show abstract

Section: Race and Gender In Judgingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trading Diversity? Judicial Diversity and Case Outcomes in Federal Courts

Copus¹,

Hübert²,

Pellaton³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Trading Diversity? Judicial Diversity and Case Outcomes in Federal Courts

COPUS,

HÜBERT,

PELLATON

2024

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are federal lawsuits resolved differently based on the race or gender of the judges assigned to hear them? Recent empirical research posits that women and judges of color decide cases more liberally, at least in some identity-salient areas of law. However, these studies analyze small numbers of cases and judges, and use research designs that limit their causal interpretations. Using an original dataset of all civil rights cases filed in 20 federal district courts over multiple decades and a strong causal identification strategy, we find that assignment of cases to judges of color or women has no statistically significant effect on case outcomes among Democratic appointees. However, it causes more conservative outcomes among Republican appointees. We explain these results with a theory of bargaining over judicial appointments in which Republican presidents take advantage of Democrats’ preference for diversity on the bench to appoint more conservative judges.

show abstract

The pew and the bench: The dynamics of religious affiliations of federal court judges

Lanier,

Hurwitz

2024

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveA critical area of study of the federal courts includes those who serve on the nation's highest tribunals. While most studies of judicial diversity address the crucial issues of race or gender, we examine the cross‐time dynamics of religious affiliations within the federal courts in the United States to more broadly encompass the concept of diversity.MethodsWe analyze over two centuries of data on the religious affiliations of judges on the District Courts and Courts of Appeals, as well as that of justices on the Supreme Court, by employing descriptive data derived from public sources and our own survey instrument, and multivariate time‐series models.ResultsOur mixed‐method analyses show that the federal courts, traditionally the near‐exclusive province of Protestants, have grown more religiously diverse over time. We illustrate that specific, salient political events, including President Wilson's appointment of Supreme Court Justice Brandeis in 1916 and the elections of Presidents Kennedy in 1960 and Carter in 1976, directly influenced the dynamics of religious affiliations in the federal courts.ConclusionsThe ascent of religious diversity in the federal courts was neither smooth nor inevitable. By incorporating the notion of belonging as a measure of religious identity and affiliation, we exhibit that a multifaceted process over time transformed religious diversity in the federal courts.

show abstract

The Consequences of Diversifying the US District Courts: Race, Gender, and Ideological Alignment through Judicial Appointments

Cited by 3 publications

References 54 publications

Trading Diversity? Judicial Diversity and Case Outcomes in Federal Courts

Trading Diversity? Judicial Diversity and Case Outcomes in Federal Courts

Trading Diversity? Judicial Diversity and Case Outcomes in Federal Courts

The pew and the bench: The dynamics of religious affiliations of federal court judges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About