谁塑造了法律?司法引文中的性别和种族偏见

IF 5.9 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
John Szmer, Laura P. Moyer, Susan B. Haire, Robert K. Christensen
{"title":"谁塑造了法律?司法引文中的性别和种族偏见","authors":"John Szmer, Laura P. Moyer, Susan B. Haire, Robert K. Christensen","doi":"10.1017/s0003055423000801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this letter, we assess whether the contributions of judges from underrepresented groups are undervalued or overlooked, thereby reducing these judges’ influence on legal policy. Drawing on an original dataset of discretionary citations to over 2,000 published federal appellate decisions, we find that the majority of opinions written by female judges receive less attention from other courts than those by similarly situated men and that this is largely attributable to disparities in citing Black women and Latinas. We also find that additional efforts by Black and Latinx judges to ground their opinions in precedent yield a much lower rate of return in subsequent citations by outside circuits than comparable work by white men and women judges. This suggests that, despite gains in diversification in the federal judiciary, stereotypes about social identities will play a powerful role in determining whose ideas receive recognition.","PeriodicalId":48451,"journal":{"name":"American Political Science Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who Shapes the Law? Gender and Racial Bias in Judicial Citations\",\"authors\":\"John Szmer, Laura P. Moyer, Susan B. Haire, Robert K. Christensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0003055423000801\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this letter, we assess whether the contributions of judges from underrepresented groups are undervalued or overlooked, thereby reducing these judges’ influence on legal policy. Drawing on an original dataset of discretionary citations to over 2,000 published federal appellate decisions, we find that the majority of opinions written by female judges receive less attention from other courts than those by similarly situated men and that this is largely attributable to disparities in citing Black women and Latinas. We also find that additional efforts by Black and Latinx judges to ground their opinions in precedent yield a much lower rate of return in subsequent citations by outside circuits than comparable work by white men and women judges. This suggests that, despite gains in diversification in the federal judiciary, stereotypes about social identities will play a powerful role in determining whose ideas receive recognition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Political Science Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Political Science Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055423000801\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055423000801","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这封信中,我们评估了代表性不足群体的法官的贡献是否被低估或忽视,从而减少了这些法官对法律政策的影响。根据2000多份已公布的联邦上诉裁决的自由裁量引用原始数据集,我们发现,女性法官撰写的大多数意见受到其他法院的关注程度低于处境相似的男性,这在很大程度上归因于引用黑人女性和拉丁裔人意见的差异。我们还发现,与白人男性和女性法官的类似工作相比,黑人和拉丁裔法官为将自己的意见建立在先例基础上所做的额外努力,在随后被外部法庭传讯时产生的回报率要低得多。这表明,尽管联邦司法机构在多元化方面取得了进展,但对社会身份的刻板印象将在决定谁的想法得到认可方面发挥强大作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Who Shapes the Law? Gender and Racial Bias in Judicial Citations
In this letter, we assess whether the contributions of judges from underrepresented groups are undervalued or overlooked, thereby reducing these judges’ influence on legal policy. Drawing on an original dataset of discretionary citations to over 2,000 published federal appellate decisions, we find that the majority of opinions written by female judges receive less attention from other courts than those by similarly situated men and that this is largely attributable to disparities in citing Black women and Latinas. We also find that additional efforts by Black and Latinx judges to ground their opinions in precedent yield a much lower rate of return in subsequent citations by outside circuits than comparable work by white men and women judges. This suggests that, despite gains in diversification in the federal judiciary, stereotypes about social identities will play a powerful role in determining whose ideas receive recognition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
119
期刊介绍: American Political Science Review is political science''s premier scholarly research journal, providing peer-reviewed articles and review essays from subfields throughout the discipline. Areas covered include political theory, American politics, public policy, public administration, comparative politics, and international relations. APSR has published continuously since 1906. American Political Science Review is sold ONLY as part of a joint subscription with Perspectives on Politics and PS: Political Science & Politics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信