journal article Explaining Judicial Diversity: The Differential Ability of Women and Minorities to Attain Seats on State Supreme and Appellate CourtsState Politics & Policy Quarterly Vol. 3, No. 4 (Winter, 2003) , pp. 329-352 (24 pages) Published By: Cambridge University Press https://www.jstor.org/stable/40421498 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. Journal Information State Politics & Policy Quarterly (SPPQ), peer-reviewed and published quarterly, is the premier publication outlet for original research on state politics and policy. The official publication of the State Politics and Policy Section of the American Political Science Association, SPPQ publishes high quality academic studies that develop and test general hypotheses of political behavior and policymaking, exploiting the unique advantages of the states. Publisher Information Cambridge University Press (www.cambridge.org) is the publishing division of the University of Cambridge, one of the world’s leading research institutions and winner of 81 Nobel Prizes. Cambridge University Press is committed by its charter to disseminate knowledge as widely as possible across the globe. It publishes over 2,500 books a year for distribution in more than 200 countries. Cambridge Journals publishes over 250 peer-reviewed academic journals across a wide range of subject areas, in print and online. Many of these journals are the leading academic publications in their fields and together they form one of the most valuable and comprehensive bodies of research available today. For more information, visit http://journals.cambridge.org. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. journal article Racial Diversity and Judicial Influence on Appellate CourtsAmerican Journal of Political Science Vol. 57, No. 1 (January 2013) , pp. 167-183 (17 pages) Published By: Midwest Political Science Association https://www.jstor.org/stable/23496550 Abstract This article evaluates the substantive consequences of judicial diversity on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Due to the small percentage of racial minorities on the federal bench, the key question in evaluating these consequences is not whether minority judges vote differently from nonminority judges, but whether their presence on appellate courts influences their colleagues and affects case outcomes. Using matching methods, I show that black judges are significantly more likely than nonblack judges to support affirmative action programs. This individual-level difference translates into a substantial causal effect of adding a black judge to an otherwise all-nonblack panel. Randomly assigning a black counterjudge—a black judge sitting with two nonblack judges—to a three-judge panel of the Courts of Appeals nearly ensures that the panel will vote in favor of an affirmative action program. These results have important implications for assessing the relationship between diversity and representation on federal courts. Journal Information The American Journal of Political Science (AJPS), published four times each year, is one of the most widely-read political science journals in the United States. AJPS is a general journal of political science open to all members of the profession and to all areas of the discipline of political science. JSTOR provides a digital archive of the print version of American Journal of Political Science. The electronic version of American Journal of Political Science is available at http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=showIssues&code;=ajps. Authorized users may be able to access the full text articles at this site. Publisher Information The Midwest Political Science Association, founded in 1939, is a national organization of more than 2,800 political science professors, researchers, students, and public administrators from throughout the United States and over 50 foreign countries. The association is dedicated to the advancement of scholarly communication in all areas of political science. Each year the association sponsors a three-day conference of political scientists in Chicago for the purpose of presenting and discussing the latest research in political science. More than 2,000 individuals participate in this conference, which features 300 panels and programs on politics. The MPSA is headquartered at Indiana University. For further information, contact William D. Morgan, Executive Director, email: . Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. Why is it important to have diversity on the Supreme Court?“The fact that we have a Supreme Court justice with sisterlocks—that goes a long way,” Rosette says. “Research suggests that diversity can enhance public confidence in the courts, and it can lead to greater trust if people look at the courts and see judges that look like them,” Bannon says.
How many justices typically serve on the US Supreme Court?There have been as few as six, but since 1869 there have been nine Justices, including one Chief Justice. All Justices are nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and hold their offices under life tenure.
|
