{"title":"陪审团的女士们","authors":"Vivian Rotenstein, V. Hans","doi":"10.36641/mjgl.29.2.gentlewomen","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article undertakes a contemporary assessment of the role of women on the jury. In 1946, at a time when few women served on U.S. juries, the all-male Supreme Court opined in Ballard v. United States: “The truth is that the two sexes are not fungible; a community made up exclusively of one is different from a community composed of both; the subtle interplay of influence of one on the other is among the imponderables.” Three-quarters of a century later, women’s legal and social status has changed dramatically, with increased participation in the labor force, expanded leadership roles, and the removal of legal and other barriers to their civic engagement, including jury service. Theoretical developments and research have produced new insights about how genderconforming individuals enact their gender roles. We combine these insights with a substantial body of jury research that has examined the effects of jurors’ gender on their decision-making processes and verdict preferences in criminal and civil cases. We also consider how nonbinary and gender-nonconforming individuals might bring distinctive perspectives and experiences to the jury. After a review of the historical record, describing shifts over time in women’s jury participation in the face of legal and societal barriers, we summarize evidence from decision-making research, gender scholarship, and jury studies to examine whether women bring a different voice to jury service. Our review, which demonstrates substantial commonalities as well as significant areas of divergence in jurors’ attitudes and verdicts as a function of their gender, altogether underscores the importance of full and equitable participation on the jury.","PeriodicalId":303089,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gentlewomen of the Jury\",\"authors\":\"Vivian Rotenstein, V. Hans\",\"doi\":\"10.36641/mjgl.29.2.gentlewomen\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Article undertakes a contemporary assessment of the role of women on the jury. In 1946, at a time when few women served on U.S. juries, the all-male Supreme Court opined in Ballard v. United States: “The truth is that the two sexes are not fungible; a community made up exclusively of one is different from a community composed of both; the subtle interplay of influence of one on the other is among the imponderables.” Three-quarters of a century later, women’s legal and social status has changed dramatically, with increased participation in the labor force, expanded leadership roles, and the removal of legal and other barriers to their civic engagement, including jury service. Theoretical developments and research have produced new insights about how genderconforming individuals enact their gender roles. We combine these insights with a substantial body of jury research that has examined the effects of jurors’ gender on their decision-making processes and verdict preferences in criminal and civil cases. We also consider how nonbinary and gender-nonconforming individuals might bring distinctive perspectives and experiences to the jury. After a review of the historical record, describing shifts over time in women’s jury participation in the face of legal and societal barriers, we summarize evidence from decision-making research, gender scholarship, and jury studies to examine whether women bring a different voice to jury service. Our review, which demonstrates substantial commonalities as well as significant areas of divergence in jurors’ attitudes and verdicts as a function of their gender, altogether underscores the importance of full and equitable participation on the jury.\",\"PeriodicalId\":303089,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.29.2.gentlewomen\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.29.2.gentlewomen","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文对女性在陪审团中的作用进行了当代评估。1946年,在美国很少有女性担任陪审团成员的时候,由男性组成的最高法院在巴拉德诉美国案(Ballard v. United States)中表示:“事实是,两性是不可替代的;一个只由一个人组成的社区不同于一个由两者组成的社区;两者之间微妙的相互影响是不可估量的。”四分之三个世纪后,妇女的法律和社会地位发生了巨大变化,劳动力参与率提高,领导作用扩大,妨碍妇女参与公民活动的法律和其他障碍消除,包括陪审团服务。理论发展和研究已经产生了关于性别一致性个体如何制定其性别角色的新见解。我们将这些见解与陪审团的大量研究相结合,这些研究考察了陪审员的性别对他们在刑事和民事案件中的决策过程和判决偏好的影响。我们还考虑了非二元和性别不一致的个人如何为陪审团带来独特的观点和经验。在回顾历史记录,描述女性在面对法律和社会障碍时参与陪审团的变化之后,我们总结了决策研究、性别学术研究和陪审团研究的证据,以检验女性是否为陪审团服务带来了不同的声音。我们的审查表明,陪审员的态度和裁决因其性别而有很大的共性,也有很大的分歧,这都强调了陪审团充分和公平参与的重要性。
This Article undertakes a contemporary assessment of the role of women on the jury. In 1946, at a time when few women served on U.S. juries, the all-male Supreme Court opined in Ballard v. United States: “The truth is that the two sexes are not fungible; a community made up exclusively of one is different from a community composed of both; the subtle interplay of influence of one on the other is among the imponderables.” Three-quarters of a century later, women’s legal and social status has changed dramatically, with increased participation in the labor force, expanded leadership roles, and the removal of legal and other barriers to their civic engagement, including jury service. Theoretical developments and research have produced new insights about how genderconforming individuals enact their gender roles. We combine these insights with a substantial body of jury research that has examined the effects of jurors’ gender on their decision-making processes and verdict preferences in criminal and civil cases. We also consider how nonbinary and gender-nonconforming individuals might bring distinctive perspectives and experiences to the jury. After a review of the historical record, describing shifts over time in women’s jury participation in the face of legal and societal barriers, we summarize evidence from decision-making research, gender scholarship, and jury studies to examine whether women bring a different voice to jury service. Our review, which demonstrates substantial commonalities as well as significant areas of divergence in jurors’ attitudes and verdicts as a function of their gender, altogether underscores the importance of full and equitable participation on the jury.