Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Empirical research (4)
- Judges (3)
- Civil rights (2)
- Courts (2)
- Employment practice (2)
-
- Race discrimination (2)
- Workplace racial harassment (2)
- ADR (1)
- Administrative law (1)
- Alternative dispute resolution (1)
- Arbitral proceedings (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Arbitrators (1)
- Asian-American judges (1)
- Asian-American litigants (1)
- Benefits (1)
- Civil Rights Act (1)
- Civil litigation (1)
- Civil rights disputes (1)
- Decision-making (1)
- Disadvantages (1)
- Empirical (1)
- Employment discrimination (1)
- Fairness (1)
- Federal judiciary (1)
- Gender (1)
- Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp. (1)
- Implicit racial bias (1)
- Judicial decisionmaking (1)
- Judicial diversity (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Labor and Employment Law
Comparing The Effects Of Judges' Gender And Arbitrators' Gender In Sex Discrimination Cases And Why It Matters, Pat K. Chew
Comparing The Effects Of Judges' Gender And Arbitrators' Gender In Sex Discrimination Cases And Why It Matters, Pat K. Chew
Articles
Empirical research substantiates that the judges’ gender makes a difference in sex discrimination and sexual harassment court cases. The author’s study of arbitration of sex discrimination cases administered by the American Arbitration Association between 2010 and 2014, however, finds that this judges’ “gender effect” does not occur. Namely, there is no significant difference in the decision-making patterns of female and male arbitrators as indicated by case outcomes.
The author proposes that characteristics of arbitrators, the arbitration process, and arbitration cases all combine to help explain the gender effect differences. Further, she suggests that this analysis reveals concerns about the arbitration …
The Realism Of Race In Judicial Decision Making: An Empirical Analysis Of Plaintiffs' Race And Judges' Race, Pat K. Chew, Robert E. Kelley
The Realism Of Race In Judicial Decision Making: An Empirical Analysis Of Plaintiffs' Race And Judges' Race, Pat K. Chew, Robert E. Kelley
Articles
American society is becoming increasingly diverse. At the same time, the federal judiciary continues to be predominantly White. What difference does this make? This article offers an empirical answer to that question through an extensive study of workplace racial harassment cases. It finds that judges of different races reach different conclusions, with non-African American judges less likely to hold for the plaintiffs. It also finds that plaintiffs of different races fare differently, with African Americans the most likely to lose and Hispanics the most likely to be successful. Finally, countering the formalism model’s tenet that judges are color-blind, the results …
Arbitral And Judicial Proceedings: Indistinguishable Justice Or Justice Denied?, Pat K. Chew
Arbitral And Judicial Proceedings: Indistinguishable Justice Or Justice Denied?, Pat K. Chew
Articles
This is an exploratory study comparing the processes and outcomes in the arbitration and the litigation of workplace racial harassment cases. Drawing from an emerging large database of arbitral opinions, this article indicates that arbitration outcomes yield a lower percentage of employee successes than in litigation of these types of cases. At the same time, while arbitration proceedings have some of the same legal formalities (legal representation, legal briefs), they do not have other protective procedural safeguards.
The Missing Minority Judges, Pat K. Chew, Luke T. Kelley-Chew
The Missing Minority Judges, Pat K. Chew, Luke T. Kelley-Chew
Articles
This essay documents the lack of Asian-American judges and considers the consequences.
Myth Of The Color-Blind Judge: An Empirical Analysis Of Racial Harassment Cases, Pat K. Chew, Robert E. Kelley
Myth Of The Color-Blind Judge: An Empirical Analysis Of Racial Harassment Cases, Pat K. Chew, Robert E. Kelley
Articles
This empirical study of over 400 federal cases, representing workplace racial harassment jurisprudence over a twenty-year period, found that judges' race significantly affects outcomes in these cases. African American judges rule differently than White judges, even when we take into account their political affiliation and case characteristics. At the same time, our findings indicate that judges of all races are attentive to relevant facts of the cases but interpret them differently. Thus, while we cannot predict how an individual judge might act, our study results strongly suggest that African American judges as a group and White judges as a group …
Solving The Puzzle Of Mead And Christensen: What Would Justice Stevens Do?, Amy J. Wildermuth
Solving The Puzzle Of Mead And Christensen: What Would Justice Stevens Do?, Amy J. Wildermuth
Articles
One area in which I teach and have become increasingly interested over the last few years is administrative law. Although one might expect at a symposium honoring the jurisprudence of Justice Stevens that I might focus solely on his most famous administrative law opinion, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., and its two-step test that requires a court to defer to a reasonable agency interpretation if the statute is ambiguous, I have instead decided to take on the United States Supreme Court's more recent consideration of what to do with those actions agencies take that, unlike the bubble rule …