Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Courts (3)
- Gender (3)
- Judges (3)
- Intersectionality (2)
- Race (2)
-
- Women (2)
- Adjudication (1)
- Appellate courts (1)
- Chisholm (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Critical mass (1)
- Disproportionate minority contact (1)
- Diversity (1)
- Federal Judges (1)
- Federal judges (1)
- Focal concerns theory (1)
- Gender and judging (1)
- Georgia (1)
- Intimate partner violence (1)
- James Iredell (1)
- John Jay (1)
- Judicial Conduct (1)
- Judicial behavior (1)
- Judicial decision making (1)
- Judicial policy (1)
- Juvenile justice (1)
- Landmark (1)
- Legal Procedure (1)
- Obama (1)
- Policy diffusion (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Understanding Racial Disparate Treatment Of Juvenile Interpersonal Violent Offenders In The Juvenile Justice System Using Focal Concerns Theory., Suzanne Overstreet
Understanding Racial Disparate Treatment Of Juvenile Interpersonal Violent Offenders In The Juvenile Justice System Using Focal Concerns Theory., Suzanne Overstreet
Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Disproportionate minority contact (DMC) is a salient issue that has been found at every stage of the decision-making process in the juvenile justice system (Hawkins & Kempf-Leonard, 2005; Kempf-Leonard, 2007; Bishop, 2005; Leiber, Bishop, & Chamlin, 2010; Leiber & Stairs, 1999). Existing research indicates that DMC influences adjudication for drug, property, and personal crimes (Fergusson, Horwood, & Swain-Campbell, 2003; Frazier, Bishop, & Henretta, 1992; Leiber & Jamieson, 1995; Leiber & Mack, 2003; Hawkins & Kempf-Leonard, 2005; Leiber, 2015). Because intimate partner violence (IPV) is a major public health problem and global concern (Djamba & Kimuna, 2008; Goo & Harlow, 2012; …
Chisholm V. Georgia (1793): Laying The Foundation For Supreme Court Precedent, Abigail Stanger
Chisholm V. Georgia (1793): Laying The Foundation For Supreme Court Precedent, Abigail Stanger
The Cardinal Edge
No abstract provided.
Assessing President Obama’S Appointment Of Women To The Federal Appellate Courts, Laura Moyer
Assessing President Obama’S Appointment Of Women To The Federal Appellate Courts, Laura Moyer
Faculty Scholarship
A major legacy of the Obama presidency was the mark he left on the federal courts with respect to increasing judicial diversity. In particular, President Obama’s appointments of women to the federal judiciary exceeded all previous presidents in terms of both absolute numbers and as a share of all judges; he also appointed a record-setting number of women of color to the lower federal courts. In this Article, I take an intersectional approach to exploring variation in the professional backgrounds, qualifications, and Senate confirmation experiences of Obama’s female appeals court appointees, comparing them with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton …
Different Voices : Measuring Female Judges' Influence On Women's Rights Issues In The U.S. Courts Of Appeal., Alyson E Hendricks
Different Voices : Measuring Female Judges' Influence On Women's Rights Issues In The U.S. Courts Of Appeal., Alyson E Hendricks
College of Arts & Sciences Senior Honors Theses
Beginning with President Carter and continuing with each successive president, the federal bench has become more diverse. This has caused scholars to turn their attention to how personal characteristics such as race and sex affect judging. Understanding the effects of gender and race on judging is crucial because white female and minority female judges may bring a different perspective to the bench than their male counterparts due to their shared experiences with discrimination. To fill a gap in the literature, this study examines the impact of women in terms of legal influence and voting behavior. The results demonstrate that women …
Trailblazers And Those That Followed : Personal Experiences, Gender, And Judicial Empathy., Laura P. Moyer, Susan B. Haire
Trailblazers And Those That Followed : Personal Experiences, Gender, And Judicial Empathy., Laura P. Moyer, Susan B. Haire
Faculty Scholarship
This paper investigates one causal mechanism that may explain why female judges on the federal appellate courts are more likely than men to side with plaintiffs in sex discrimination cases. To test whether personal experiences with inequality are related to empathetic responses to the claims of female plaintiffs, we focus on the first wave of female judges, who attended law school during a time of severe gender inequality. We find that female judges are more likely than their male colleagues to support plaintiffs in sex discrimination cases, but that this difference is seen only in judges who graduated law school …
Diversity, Deliberations, And Judicial Opinion Writing., Susan B. Haire, Laura P. Moyer, Shawn Treier
Diversity, Deliberations, And Judicial Opinion Writing., Susan B. Haire, Laura P. Moyer, Shawn Treier
Faculty Scholarship
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.
Rethinking Critical Mass In The Federal Appellate Courts., Laura Moyer
Rethinking Critical Mass In The Federal Appellate Courts., Laura Moyer
Faculty Scholarship
This article draws from critical mass studies of gender in other political institutions to inform an application to the US Courts of Appeals. The results demonstrate the utility of considering court-level aspects of diversity. As mixed-sex panels become more common within a circuit, both male and female judges increasingly support plaintiffs in civil rights claims, though the magnitude of the effect is larger for women. The presence of a female chief judge is also positively associated with pro-plaintiff decisions by men and women in sex discrimination cases.
Judicial Innovation And Sexual Harassment Doctrine In The U.S. Court Of Appeals., Laura P. Moyer, Holley Takersley
Judicial Innovation And Sexual Harassment Doctrine In The U.S. Court Of Appeals., Laura P. Moyer, Holley Takersley
Faculty Scholarship
The determination that sexual harassment constituted “discrimination based on sex” under Title VII was first made by the lower federal courts, not Congress. Drawing from the literature on policy diffusion, this article examines the adoption of hostile work environment standards across the U.S. Courts of Appeals in the absence of controlling Supreme Court precedent. The results bolster recent findings about the influence of female judges on their male colleagues and suggest that in addition to siding with female plaintiffs, female judges also helped to shape legal rules that promoted gender equality in the workplace.
Gender, Race, And Intersectionality On The Federal Appellate Bench., Todd Collins, Laura Moyer
Gender, Race, And Intersectionality On The Federal Appellate Bench., Todd Collins, Laura Moyer
Faculty Scholarship
While theoretical justifications predict that a judge’s gender and race may influence judicial decisions, empirical support for these arguments has been mixed. However, recent increases in judicial diversity necessitate a reexamination of these earlier studies. Rather than examining individual judges on a single characteristic, such as gender or race alone, this research note argues that the intersection of individual characteristics may provide an alternative approach for evaluating the effects of diversity on the federal appellate bench. The results of cohort models examining the joint effects of race and gender suggest that minority female judges are more likely to support criminal …
Advocacy Through Briefs In The U.S. Court Of Appeals., Susan B. Haire, Laura P. Moyer
Advocacy Through Briefs In The U.S. Court Of Appeals., Susan B. Haire, Laura P. Moyer
Faculty Scholarship
The focus of this paper is to evaluate the role of advocates in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit by examining the characterization of issues offered in appellate briefs against the issues addressed in the court's decisions. Specifically, in an environment in which attorneys are expected to frame the issues on appeal and judges are expected to respond to those issues, what accounts for judges addressing some issues while suppressing others? By explicitly focusing on how the substantive content of an opinion is shaped, we depart from other, earlier scholarship on the advantages of "repeat player" litigants …
Specifying Grounds For Judicial Disqualification In Federal Courts., Leslie W. Abramson
Specifying Grounds For Judicial Disqualification In Federal Courts., Leslie W. Abramson
Faculty Scholarship
One essential component of equal justice under the law is a neutral and detached judge to preside over the court proceedings. Public confidence in the legal system is maintained when a judge has no interest in the parties, attorneys or subject matter of the litigation. Sua sponte or by motion of a party, a federal judge is subject to disqualification for conflicts of interest on both constitutional and statutory grounds