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' demograp...

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051617-090650

Bias and Judging

This article addresses a key question in debates around judicial diversity: what evidence is there that a more diverse judiciary will make a difference to substantive decision-making? The article begins by outlining the range of arguments for a more diverse judiciary which include, but are not confined to, making a difference to substantive decision-making. It then turns to consider the considerable evidence which now exists both to refute and to support the existence of substantive differences in decision-making following the appointment to the judiciary of women and others from non-traditional backgrounds. On the basis of this evidence, it draws conclusions as to the kinds of differences in decision-making which might be expected, and the circumstances under which different approaches to decision-making are likely to flourish.

/pdf/more-than-just-a-different-face-judicial-diversity-and-1kvgq7f767.pdf

More than Just a Different Face? Judicial Diversity and Decision-making

The research problem this dissertation addresses is how judicial practices generate administrative justice in asylum determination procedures. Previous research on immigration policies argues that ...

In Courts We Trust : Administrative Justice in Swedish Migration Courts

Underlying scholarly interest in diversity is the premise that a representative body contributes to robust decision-making processes. Using an innovative measure of opinion content, we examine this premise by analyzing deliberative outputs in the US courts of appeals (1997–2002). While the presence of a single female or minority did not affect the attention to issues in the majority opinion, panels composed of a majority of women or minorities produced opinions with significantly more points of law compared to panels with three Caucasian males.

/pdf/diversity-deliberation-and-judicial-opinion-writing-4cmhh6e5q5.pdf

Diversity, Deliberation, and Judicial Opinion Writing

Text classification of ideological direction in judicial opinions

In this study, we explore gendered patterns of voting, and whether such patterns appear only after a critical mass of female justices is reached by analyzing the votes of justices in the Supreme Court of Canada. We employ a logistic regression model of the differences in the voting behavior of male versus female justices, using the universe of Supreme Court votes from 1982 through 2007. Our analysis supports the conclusion that women vote more liberally on civil rights, equality, and private economic cases, and more conservatively on criminal cases. However, we find no evidence that indicates a need for a critical mass of women justices for them to vote their sincere preferences.

/pdf/judge-gender-critical-mass-and-decision-making-in-the-17jltpi69t.pdf

Nadia A. Jilani

Papers

Judge Gender, Critical Mass, and Decision Making in the Appellate Courts of Canada

Gender, consciousness raising, and decision making on the Supreme Court of Canada