{"title":"法律专业作为司法机构的守门人:加强多元化措施的设计缺陷","authors":"L. Barmes, K. Malleson","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00845.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The gate-keeping role played by the legal profession in the judicial appointments process gives rise to the translation of entrenched group-based identity hierarchies from legal practice into the judiciary. The relationship between the composition of the legal profession and the judiciary has been almost completely unaffected by recent reforms designed to increase diversity in the composition of the judiciary. This article identifies legal and institutional defects which help to explain the failure to disrupt the reproduction of these patterns of appointment. We identify two particular defects which we call soft target radicalism and regulatory bind as important factors inhibiting change. We conclude that if the legal profession is to retain its gate-keeping role, equality law which directly regulates legal practice should be strengthened and the regulatory binds in which the Judicial Appointments Commission and other public entities are caught should be loosened.","PeriodicalId":412430,"journal":{"name":"LSN: The Judiciary & Judicial Process (Topic)","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Legal Profession as Gatekeeper to the Judiciary: Design Faults in Measures to Enhance Diversity\",\"authors\":\"L. Barmes, K. Malleson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00845.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The gate-keeping role played by the legal profession in the judicial appointments process gives rise to the translation of entrenched group-based identity hierarchies from legal practice into the judiciary. The relationship between the composition of the legal profession and the judiciary has been almost completely unaffected by recent reforms designed to increase diversity in the composition of the judiciary. This article identifies legal and institutional defects which help to explain the failure to disrupt the reproduction of these patterns of appointment. We identify two particular defects which we call soft target radicalism and regulatory bind as important factors inhibiting change. We conclude that if the legal profession is to retain its gate-keeping role, equality law which directly regulates legal practice should be strengthened and the regulatory binds in which the Judicial Appointments Commission and other public entities are caught should be loosened.\",\"PeriodicalId\":412430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: The Judiciary & Judicial Process (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: The Judiciary & Judicial Process (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00845.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: The Judiciary & Judicial Process (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00845.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Legal Profession as Gatekeeper to the Judiciary: Design Faults in Measures to Enhance Diversity
The gate-keeping role played by the legal profession in the judicial appointments process gives rise to the translation of entrenched group-based identity hierarchies from legal practice into the judiciary. The relationship between the composition of the legal profession and the judiciary has been almost completely unaffected by recent reforms designed to increase diversity in the composition of the judiciary. This article identifies legal and institutional defects which help to explain the failure to disrupt the reproduction of these patterns of appointment. We identify two particular defects which we call soft target radicalism and regulatory bind as important factors inhibiting change. We conclude that if the legal profession is to retain its gate-keeping role, equality law which directly regulates legal practice should be strengthened and the regulatory binds in which the Judicial Appointments Commission and other public entities are caught should be loosened.