1932

Abstract

How do we know whether judges of different backgrounds are biased? We review the substantial political science literature on judicial decision making, paying close attention to how judges' demographics and ideology can influence or structure their decision making. As the research demonstrates, characteristics such as race, ethnicity, and gender can sometimes predict judicial decision making in limited kinds of cases; however, the literature also suggests that these characteristics are far less important in shaping or predicting outcomes than is ideology (or partisanship), which in turn correlates closely with gender, race, and ethnicity. This leads us to conclude that assuming judges of different backgrounds are biased because they rule differently is questionable. Given that the application of the law rarely provides one objectively correct answer, it is no surprise that judges' decisions vary according to their personal backgrounds and, more importantly, according to their ideology.

Keyword(s): biasgenderjudgingjudicial behaviorrace
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051617-090650
2019-05-11
2024-06-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/polisci/22/1/annurev-polisci-051617-090650.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051617-090650&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abrams DS, Bertrand M, Mullainathan S 2012. Do judges vary in their treatment of race?. J. Legal Stud. 41:2347–83
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Adamany DW 1969. The party variable in judges' voting: conceptual notes and a case study. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 63:157–73
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Allen DW, Wall DE 1993. Role orientations and women state supreme court justices. Judicature 77:3156
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashenfelter O, Eisenberg T, Schwab SJ 1995. Politics and the judiciary: the influence of judicial background on case outcomes. J. Legal Stud. 24:2257–81
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bonica A, Sen M 2017. A common-space scaling of the American judiciary and legal profession. Political Anal 25:1114–21
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Box-Steffensmeier JM, De Boef S, Lin T-M 2004. The dynamics of the partisan gender gap. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 98:3515–28
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Boyd CL 2011. Federal district court judge ideology data Univ. Georgia http://cLboyd.net/ideology.html
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Boyd CL 2013. She'll settle it?. J. Law Courts 1:2193–219
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Boyd CL 2016. Representation on the courts? The effects of trial judges' sex and race. Political Res. Q. 69:4788–99
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Boyd CL, Epstein L, Martin AD 2010. Untangling the causal effects of sex on judging. Am. J. Political Sci. 54:2389–411
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Boyea BD 2010. Does seniority matter? The conditional influence of state methods of judicial retention. Soc. Sci. Q. 91:1209–27
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Brace P, Langer L, Gann Hall M 2000. Measuring the preferences of state Supreme Court judges. J. Politics 62:2387–413
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chew PK, Kelley RE 2008. Myth of the color-blind judge: an empirical analysis of racial harassment cases. Wash. Univ. Law Rev. 86:1117
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cohen A, Yang CS 2019. Judicial politics and sentencing decisions. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 11:160–91
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Collins TA, Dumas TL, Moyer LP 2017. Intersecting disadvantages: race, gender, and age discrimination among attorneys. Soc. Sci. Q. 98:51642–58
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Collins TA, Moyer L 2008. Gender, race, and intersectionality on the federal appellate bench. Political Res. Q. 61:2219–27
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Conover PJ, Sapiro V 1993. Gender, feminist consciousness, and war. Am. J. Political Sci. 37:41079–99
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Cox AB, Miles TJ 2008a. Judging the Voting Rights Act. Columbia Law Rev 108:11–54
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Cox AB, Miles TJ 2008b. Judicial ideology and the transformation of voting rights jurisprudence. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 75:41493–539
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Davis S 1992. Do women judges speak “in a different voice?” Carol Gilligan, feminist legal theory, and the Ninth Circuit. Wisc. Women's Law J. 8:143
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Davis S, Haire S, Songer DR 1993. Voting behavior and gender on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Judicature 77:129
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Edlund L, Pande R 2002. Why have women become left-wing? The political gender gap and the decline in marriage. Q. J. Econ. 117:3917–61
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Epstein L, Knight J 1998. The Choices Justices Make Washington, DC: CQ Press
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Epstein L, Knight J 2013. Reconsidering judicial preferences. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 16:11–31
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Epstein L, Landes WM, Posner RA 2013. The Behavior of Federal Judges: A Theoretical and Empirical Study of Rational Choice Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Epstein L, Martin AD 2004. Does age (really) matter? A response to Manning, Carroll, and Carp. Soc. Sci. Q. 85:119–30
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Epstein L, Martin AD, Segal JA, Westerland C 2007. The judicial common space. J. Law Econ. Organ. 23:2303–25
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Farhang S, Wawro G 2004. Institutional dynamics on the U.S. Court of Appeals: minority representation under panel decision making. J. Law Econ. Organ. 20:2299
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Flango VE, Ducat CR 1977. Toward an integration of public law and judicial behavior. J. Politics 39:141–72
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Frank J 1930. Law and the Modern Mind New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Friedman B 2006. Taking law seriously. Perspect. Politics 4:2261–76
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Gazal-Ayal O, Sulitzeanu-Kenan R 2010. Let my people go: ethnic in-group bias in judicial decisions—evidence from a randomized natural experiment. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 7:3403–28
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Giles MW, Hettinger VA, Peppers T 2001. Picking federal judges: a note on policy and partisan selection agendas. Political Res. Q. 54:3623–41
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Gill RD, Kagan M, Marouf F 2017. The impact of maleness on judicial decision making: masculinity, chivalry, and immigration appeals. Politics Groups Identities1–20
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Gill RD, Lazos SR, Waters MM 2011. Are judicial performance evaluations fair to women and minorities? A cautionary tale from Clark County, Nevada. Law Soc. Rev. 45:3731–59
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Gilligan C 1982. In a Different Voice Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Gleason SA, Jones JJ, McBean JR 2018. The role of gender norms in judicial decision-making at the US Supreme Court: the case of male and female justices. Am. Politics Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x18766466
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  38. Glynn AN, Sen M 2015. Identifying judicial empathy: Does having daughters cause judges to rule for women's issues?. Am. J. Political Sci. 59:137–54
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Goldman S 1968. Conflict and consensus in the United States Courts of Appeals. Wisc. Law Rev. 2:461–82
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Goldman S 1975. Voting behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals revisited. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 69:2491–506
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Grey TC 1983. Langdell's orthodoxy. Univ. Pittsburgh Law Rev. 45:1
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Grossman G, Gazal-Ayal O, Pimentel SD, Weinstein JM 2016. Descriptive representation and judicial outcomes in multiethnic societies. Am. J. Political Sci. 60:144–69
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Gryski GS, Main EC, Dixon WJ 1986. Models of state high court decision making in sex discrimination cases. J. Politics 48:1143–55
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Haire SB, Moyer LP 2015. Diversity Matters: Judicial Policy Making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals Charlottesville: Univ. Va. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Haire SB, Moyer LP, Treier S 2013. Diversity, deliberation, and judicial opinion writing. J. Law Courts 1:2303–30
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Harris AP 2018. Can racial diversity among judges affect sentencing outcomes? Work. Pap., Pa. State Univ https://www.allisonpharris.com/uploads/1/0/7/3/107342067/harris_diversitysentencing.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Hinkle RK 2015. Legal constraint in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. J. Politics 77:3721–35
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Holmes MD, Hosch HM, Daudistel HC et al. 1993. Judges' ethnicity and minority sentencing: evidence concerning Hispanics. Soc. Sci. Q. 74:3496–506
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Holmes OW Jr. 1909. The Common Law Boston: Little, Brown
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Howell SE, Day CL 2000. Complexities of the gender gap. J. Politics 62:3858–74
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Hull NEH 1989. Reconstructing the origins of realistic jurisprudence: a prequel to the Llewellyn-Pound exchange over legal realism. Duke Law J 1989:51302–34
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Hutchings VL, Valentino NA 2004. The centrality of race in American politics. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 7:383–408
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Johnson SW, Songer DR, Jilani NA 2011. Judge gender, critical mass, and decision making in the Appellate Courts of Canada. J. Women Politics Policy 32:3237–60
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Kaheny EB, Haire SB, Benesh SC 2008. Change over tenure: voting, variance, and decision making on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Am. J. Political Sci. 52:3490–503
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Kanter RM 2008. Men and Women of the Corporation New York: Basic Books, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Karst KL 1984. Woman's constitution. Duke Law J 3:447
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Kastellec JP 2013. Racial diversity and judicial influence on appellate courts. Am. J. Political Sci. 57:1167–83
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Kirkland PA, Coppock A 2017. Candidate choice without party labels. Political Behav 3:571–92
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Llewellyn KN 1931. Some realism about realism: responding to Dean Pound. Harvard Law Rev 44:81222–64
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Manning KL, Carroll BA, Carp RA 2004. Does age matter? Judicial decision making in age discrimination cases. Soc. Sci. Q. 85:11–18
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Martin AD, Quinn KM 2002. Dynamic ideal point estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999. Political Anal 10:2134–53
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Martin AD, Quinn KM, Ruger TW, Kim PT 2004. Competing approaches to predicting Supreme Court decision making. Perspect. Politics 2:4761–67
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Martin E, Pyle B 1999. Gender, race, and partisanship on the Michigan Supreme Court. Albany Law Rev 63:1205
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Menkel-Meadow C 1985. Portia in a different voice: speculations on a women's lawyering process. Berkeley Women's Law J 1:139–63
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Miller WE, Shanks JM, Shapiro RY 1996. The New American Voter Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Morin JL 2014. The voting behavior of minority judges in the US Courts of Appeals: Does the race of the claimant matter?. Am. Politics Res. 42:134–64
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Nagel SS 1961. Political party affiliation and judges' decisions. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 55:4843–50
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Nomination of Sonia Sotomayor. 2009. Confirmation Hearing on the Nomination of Hon. Sonia Sotomayor, to Be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States Senate 111th Congr.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Norrander B, Wilcox C 2008. The gender gap in ideology. Political Behav 30:4503–23
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Peresie JL 2005. Female judges matter: gender and collegial decisionmaking in the federal appellate courts. Yale Law J 114:71759–892
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Pew Res. Cent. 2017. The partisan divide on political values grows even wider News Release, Oct. 5 Pew Res. Cent. Washington, DC: http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/10/05162647/10-05-2017-Political-landscape-release.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Pinello DR 1999. Linking party to judicial ideology in American courts: a meta-analysis. Justice Syst. J. 3:219–54
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Pinello DR 2003. Gay Rights and American Law New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Posner RA 2010. How Judges Think Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Pound R 1908. Mechanical Jurisprudence New York: Columbia Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Pritchett CH 1948. The Roosevelt Court: A Study in Judicial Politics and Values, 1937–1947 New York: Macmillan Group
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Rachlinski JJ, Wistrich AJ 2017. Judging the judiciary by the numbers: empirical research on judges. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 13:203–29
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Ramakrishnan SK 2014. Asian Americans and the rainbow: the prospects and limits of coalitional politics. Politics Groups Identities 2:3522–29
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Rohde DW, Spaeth HJ 1976. Supreme Court Decision Making San Francisco: W.H. Freeman
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Roper Cent. Public Opin. Res. 2008. How groups voted in 2008 Poll results, Roper Cent. Public Opin. Res., Cornell Univ. Ithaca, NY: https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/how-groups-voted-2008/
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Roper Cent. Public Opin. Res. 2016. How groups voted in 2016 Exit poll results for 2016 Roper Cent. Public Opin. Res., Cornell Univ. Ithaca, NY: https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/groups-voted-2016/
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Ruger TW, Kim PT, Martin AD, Quinn KM 2004. The Supreme Court forecasting project: legal and political science approaches to predicting Supreme Court decisionmaking. Columbia Law Rev 104:41150–210
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Schanzenbach MM 2005. Racial and sex disparities in prison sentences: the effect of district-level judicial demographics. J. Legal Stud. 34:157–92
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Schanzenbach MM, Tiller EH 2006. Strategic judging under the US sentencing guidelines: positive political theory and evidence. J. Law Econ. Organ. 23:124–56
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Scherer N 2004. Blacks on the bench. Political Sci. Q. 119:4655–75
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Scherer N, Curry B 2010. Does descriptive race representation enhance institutional legitimacy? The case of the U.S. courts. J. Politics 72:190–104
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Schubert GA 1959. Quantitative Analysis of Judicial Behavior Glencoe, IL: Free Press
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Segal JA 1985. Measuring change on the Supreme Court: examining alternative models. Am. J. Political Sci. 29:3461–79
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Segal JA 2000. Representative decision making on the federal bench: Clinton's district court appointees. Political Res. Q. 53:1137–50
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Segal JA, Cover AD 1989. Ideological values and the votes of U.S. Supreme Court justices. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 83:2557–65
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Segal JA, Spaeth HJ 1993. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Segal JA, Spaeth HJ 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Segura GM 2012. Latino public opinion and realigning the American electorate. Daedalus 141:498–113
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Sen M 2014a. How judicial qualification ratings may disadvantage minority and female candidates. J. Law Courts 1:233–65
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Sen M 2014b. How minority judicial candidates have changed, but the ABA ratings gap has not. Judicature 98:446–53
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Sen M 2015. Is justice really blind? Race and reversal in U.S. Courts. J. Legal Studies 44:S1S187–S229
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Sen M 2017. Diversity, qualifications, and ideology: how female and minority judges have changed, or not changed, over time. Wisc. Law Rev. 2017:2367
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Shahshahani S, Liu LJ 2017. Religion and judging on the federal Courts of Appeals. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 14:4716–44
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Shapiro RY, Mahajan H 1986. Gender differences in policy preferences: a summary of trends from the 1960s to the 1980s. Public Opin. Q. 50:142–61
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Sherry S 1986. Civic virtue and the feminine voice in constitutional adjudication. Va. Law Rev. 72:3543–616
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Smelcer SN, Steigerwalt A, Vining RL Jr. 2011. Bias and the bar: evaluating the ABA ratings of federal judicial nominees. Political Res. Q. 65:4827–40
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Songer DR, Tabrizi SJ 1999. The religious right in court: the decision making of Christian evangelicals in state supreme courts. J. Politics 61:2507–26
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Sotomayor S 2002. A Latina judge's voice. Berkeley Raza Law J 13:87
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Spaeth HJ 1961. An approach to the study of attitudinal differences as an aspect of judicial behavior. Midw. J. Political Sci. 5:2165–80
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Spohn C 1990. The sentencing decisions of black and white judges: expected and unexpected similarities. Law Soc. Rev. 24:51197–216
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Steffensmeier D, Britt CL 2001. Judges' race and judicial decision making: Do black judges sentence differently?. Soc. Sci. Q. 82:4749–64
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Sunstein CR, Schkade D, Ellman LM, Sawicki A 2006. Are Judges Political? Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Tate CN 1981. Personal attribute models of the voting behavior of U.S. Supreme Court justices: liberalism in civil liberties and economics decisions, 1946–1978. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 75:2355–67
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Tetlock PE, Bernzweig J, Gallant JL 1985. Supreme Court decision making: cognitive style as a predictor of ideological consistency of voting. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 48:51227
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Ulmer SS 1960. The analysis of behavior patterns on the United States Supreme Court. J. Politics 22:4629–53
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Ulmer SS 1962. The political party variable in the Michigan Supreme Court. J. Public Law 11:2352
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Walker TG, Barrow DJ 1985. The diversification of the federal bench: policy and process ramifications. J. Politics 47:02596–617
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Weinberg JD, Nielsen LB 2011. Examining empathy: discrimination, experience, and judicial decisionmaking. Univ. Southern Calif. Law Rev. 85:313
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Welch S, Combs M, Gruhl J 1988. Do black judges make a difference?. Am. J. Political Sci. 32:1126–36
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Zorn C, Bowie JB 2010. Ideological influences on decision making in the federal judicial hierarchy: an empirical assessment. J. Politics 72:41212–21
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051617-090650
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error