How You Rate Depends on Who Investigates: Partisan Bias in ABA Ratings of US Courts of Appeals Nominees, 1958–2020

IF 1.5 2区社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Political Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-05-12 DOI:10.1177/10659129231175169

James A. Sieja

{"title":"How You Rate Depends on Who Investigates: Partisan Bias in ABA Ratings of US Courts of Appeals Nominees, 1958–2020","authors":"James A. Sieja","doi":"10.1177/10659129231175169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent work on the federal judicial nominations process finds relationships between nominees’ characteristics, such as partisanship and gender, and American Bar Association (ABA) ratings. While the findings inform public debate about ABA involvement in the nomination, the studies do not take into account the characteristics of the individuals who investigate the nominees. This study adds investigator partisanship to understand more completely the relationship between nominees and their ABA ratings. The results indicate that the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary (SCFJ) investigators’ partisanship contribute systematically to a nominee’s likelihood of receiving a higher or lower ABA rating. The probability that a Republican nominee receives the highest rating does not vary with the investigator’s partisanship. Democratic nominees, however, have the highest chance of the top rating after an SCFJ investigation led by a co-partisan. An analysis of matched data from the whole dataset reproduces the basic pattern of results, while the implementation of matching to partisan subgroups of nominees uncovers that both parties may benefit roughly equally from investigations led by co-partisans.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231175169","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent work on the federal judicial nominations process finds relationships between nominees’ characteristics, such as partisanship and gender, and American Bar Association (ABA) ratings. While the findings inform public debate about ABA involvement in the nomination, the studies do not take into account the characteristics of the individuals who investigate the nominees. This study adds investigator partisanship to understand more completely the relationship between nominees and their ABA ratings. The results indicate that the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary (SCFJ) investigators’ partisanship contribute systematically to a nominee’s likelihood of receiving a higher or lower ABA rating. The probability that a Republican nominee receives the highest rating does not vary with the investigator’s partisanship. Democratic nominees, however, have the highest chance of the top rating after an SCFJ investigation led by a co-partisan. An analysis of matched data from the whole dataset reproduces the basic pattern of results, while the implementation of matching to partisan subgroups of nominees uncovers that both parties may benefit roughly equally from investigations led by co-partisans.

查看原文本刊更多论文

你的评分取决于谁调查:1958-2020年美国上诉法院候选人的ABA评级中的党派偏见

最近关于联邦司法提名程序的研究发现，被提名人的特征（如党派和性别）与美国律师协会（ABA）的评级之间存在关系。虽然这些发现为关于美国律师协会参与提名的公开辩论提供了信息，但这些研究没有考虑到调查被提名人的个人的特征。这项研究增加了调查人员的党派偏见，以更全面地了解被提名人与其ABA评级之间的关系。结果表明，联邦司法常务委员会（SCFJ）调查人员的党派偏见系统地影响了被提名人获得更高或更低ABA评级的可能性。共和党提名人获得最高评级的概率与调查人员的党派立场无关。然而，民主党提名人在由两党共同领导的SCFJ调查后获得最高评级的几率最高。对整个数据集匹配数据的分析再现了结果的基本模式，而对提名人的党派分组进行匹配的实施表明，两党可能从共同党派领导的调查中大致平等地受益。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Political Research Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

3.60

自引率

4.80%

发文量

109

期刊介绍： Political Research Quarterly (PRQ) is the official journal of the Western Political Science Association. PRQ seeks to publish scholarly research of exceptionally high merit that makes notable contributions in any subfield of political science. The editors especially encourage submissions that employ a mixture of theoretical approaches or multiple methodologies to address major political problems or puzzles at a local, national, or global level. Collections of articles on a common theme or debate, to be published as short symposia, are welcome as well as individual submissions.