Hostname: page-component-669899f699-qzcqf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-02T13:12:47.935Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Role of Judge Gender and Ideology in Hiring Female Law Clerks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2024

Alex Badas Open the ORCID record for Alex Badas [Opens in a new window] ,
Bailey K. Sanders Open the ORCID record for Bailey K. Sanders [Opens in a new window]  and
Katelyn E. Stauffer Open the ORCID record for Katelyn E. Stauffer [Opens in a new window]
Alex Badas*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Houston, Houston, Texas USA
Bailey K. Sanders
Affiliation:
Visiting Assistant Professor, Duke University School of Law Durham, North Carolina USA
Katelyn E. Stauffer
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Georgia, Athena, Georgia USA
*
Corresponding author: Alex Badas; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Federal law clerks play a vital role in the development and implementation of the law. Yet, women remain underrepresented in these positions. We suggest that one reason for this underrepresentation may be differences in hiring practices among judges in the federal judiciary. Specifically, we hypothesize that male judges and conservative judges may be less likely to hire female law clerks than female judges and liberal judges for two reasons. First, gendered attitudes held by judges may make some judges prone to hire women and/or others more resistant to these hires. Second, due to ideological asymmetries between the law clerk pool and judges in the federal judiciary, conservative judges and male judges may be less likely to hire women law clerks. Using data on clerks hired in the federal judiciary between 1995 and 2005, we find support for both mechanisms.1

Keywords

judicial politicswomen and politicslaw clerksrepresentation
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Law and Courts , First View , pp. 1 - 23
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Achen, Christopher H. 2005. “Let’s put garbage-can regressions and garbage-can probits where they belong.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 22(4): 327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anzia, Sarah F., and Berry, Christopher R. 2011. “The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson effect: Why do congresswomen outperform congressmen?” American Journal of Political Science 55(3): 478–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery, Christopher, Jolls, Christine, Posner, Richard A. and Roth, Alvin E.. 2001. “The market for federal judicial law clerks.” U. chI. l. Rev. 68: 793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badas, Alex. 2020. “Elevation potential among Circuit Court nominees and its effect on the Senate’s confirmation behavior.” Political Research Quarterly 73(1): 96–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badas, Alex, and Stauffer, Katelyn E.. 2018. “Someone like me: Descriptive representation and support for Supreme Court nominees.” Political Research Quarterly 70(1): 127–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badas, Alex, and Stauffer, Katelyn E.. 2019. “Voting for women in nonpartisan and partisan elections.” Electoral Studies 57: 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badas, Alex, and Stauffer, Katelyn E.. 2023. “Gender and ambition among potential law clerks.” Journal of Law and Courts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, Lawrence, and Ditslear, Corey. 2010. “Supreme Court clerkships and “feeder” judges.” Justice System Journal 31(1): 26–48.Google Scholar
Bird, Christine C., and McGee, Zachary A.. 2023. “Going nuclear: Federalist Society affiliated judicial nominees’ prospects and a new era of confirmation politics.” American Politics Research 51(1): 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonica, Adam. 2014. “Mapping the ideological marketplace.” American Journal of Political Science 58(2): 367–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonica, Adam, Chilton, Adam, Goldin, Jacob, Rozema, Kyle, and Sen, Maya. 2019. “Legal Rasputins? Law clerk influence on voting at the US Supreme Court.” The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 35(1): 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonica, Adam, Chilton, Adam S., Goldin, Jacob, Rozema, Kyle, and Sen, Maya. 2017. “The political ideologies of law clerks.” American Law and Economics Review 19(1): 96–128.Google Scholar
Bonica, Adam, and Sen, Maya. 2017. “A common-space scaling of the American judiciary and legal profession.” Political Analysis 25(1): 114–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonica, Adam, and Sen, Maya. 2020. The Judicial Tug of War: How Lawyers, Politicians, and Ideological Incentives Shape the American Judiciary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonica, Adam, and Sen, Maya. 2021. “Estimating judicial ideology.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 35(1): 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Christina L. 2016. “Representation on the courts? The effects of trial judges’ sex and race.” Political Research Quarterly 69(4): 788–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Christina L., Epstein, Lee, and Martin, Andrew D.. 2010. “Untangling the causal effects of sex on judging.” American Journal of Political Science 54: 389–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Christina, Collins, Paul M., and Ringhand, Lori. 2023. Supreme Bias: Gender and Race in US Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Mark R. 1996. “Gender discrimination in the Supreme Court’s clerkship selection process.” Or. L. Rev. 75: 359.Google Scholar
Chaney, Carole Kennedy, Alvarez, R. Michael, and Nagler, Jonathan. 1998. “Explaining the gender gap in US presidential elections, 1980-1992.” Political Research Quarterly 51(2): 311–339.Google Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston. 1984. “The influence of group identification on political perception and evaluations.” Journal of Politics 46(3): 760–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston. 1988. “The role of social groups in political thinking.” British Journal of Political Science 18(1): 51–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dietrich, Bryce J., Hayes, Matthew, and O’Brien, Diana Z.. 2019. “Pitch perfect: Vocal pitch and the emotional intensity of congressional speech.” American Political Science Review 113(4): 941–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ditslear, Corey, and Baum, Lawrence. 2001. “Selection of law clerks and polarization in the US Supreme Court.” The Journal of Politics 63(3): 869–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Lee, Martin, Andrew D., Segal, Jeffrey A., and Westerland, Chad. 2007. “The judicial common space .” The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 23(2): 303–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Segal, Jeffrey A. 2005. Advice and Consent: The Politics of Judicial Appointments. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fogel, Jeremy, Hoopes, Mary, and Liu, Goodwin. 2022. “Law clerk selection and diversity: Insights from fifty sitting judges of the federal courts of appeals.” Available at SSRN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulton, Sarah A. 2012. “Running backwards and in high heels: The gendered quality gap and incumbent electoral success.” Political Research Quarterly 65(2): 303–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossmann, Matt, and Hopkins, David A.. 2016. Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haire, Susan B., and Moyer, Laura P.. 2015. Diversity Matters: Judicial Policy Making in the US Courts of Appeals. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
Hollis-Brusky, Amanda. 2015. Ideas with Consequences: The Federalist Society and the Conservative Counterrevolution . New York: Oxford University Press. Huddy, Huddy, Leonie, , and Terkildsen, Nayda. 1993. “Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates.” American Journal of Political Science, 119–147.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, Karen, and Petrocik, John R.. 2020. The Changing Politics of American Men, Updated. In The Forum, vol. 18. (De Gruyter), 169–175.Google Scholar
Kaye, David H., and Gastwirth, Joseph L.. 2008. “Where have all the women gone? The gender gap in Supreme Court clerkships.” Jurimetrics 49: 411.Google Scholar
Kenney, Sally J. 2000. “Puppeteers or agents? What Lazarus’s Closed Chambers adds to our understanding of law clerks at the US Supreme Court.” Law & Social Inquiry 25(1): 185–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, David C., and Matland, Richard E. 2003. “Sex and the grand old party: An experimental investigation of the effect of candidate sex on support for a Republican candidate.” American Politics Research 31(6): 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, Jeffrey W. 2000. “Do citizens apply gender stereotypes to infer candidates’ ideological orientations?” The Journal of Politics 62(2): 414–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, Jeffrey W. 2002a. “Gender stereotypes and citizens’ impressions of House candidates’ ideological orientations.” American Journal of Political Science, 453–462.Google Scholar
Koch, Jeffrey W. 2002b. “Gender stereotypes and citizens’ impressions of House candidates’ ideological orientations.” American Journal of Political Science, 453–462.Google Scholar
Kromphardt, Christopher. 2017. “Evaluating the effect of law clerk gender on voting at the United States Supreme Court.” Justice System Journal 38(2): 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazarus, Jeffrey, and Steigerwalt, Amy. 2018. Gendered Vulnerability: How Women Work Harder to Stay in Office. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moyer, Laura P., and Tankersley, Holley. 2012. “Judicial innovation and sexual harassment doctrine in the US Courts of Appeals.” Political Research Quarterly 65(4): 784–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moyer, Laura P., and Haire, Susan B.. 2015. “Trailblazers and those that followed: Personal experiences, gender, and judicial empathy.” Law & Society Review 49(3): 665–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norrander, Barbara, and Wilcox, Clyde. 2008. “The gender gap in ideology.” Political Behavior 30: 503–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborn, Tracy L. 2012. How Women Represent Women: Political Parties, Gender and Representation in the State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, Dana, and Smith, Joseph L. 2017. “Lawyer, interrupted: Gender bias in oral arguments at the US Supreme Court.” Journal of Law and Courts 5(2): 337–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, Dana, and Smith, Joseph L. 2020. “Gender, ideology, and dominance in Supreme Court oral arguments.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 41(4): 393–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, Kathryn, and Dancey, Logan. 2011. “Speaking for the underrepresented in the House of Representatives: Voicing women’s interests in a partisan era.” Politics & Gender 7(4): 493–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peppers, Todd C. 2006. Courtiers of the Marble Palace: The Rise and Influence of the Supreme Court Law Clerk. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, James C., and Carter, Edward L. 2009. “Gender and US Supreme Court oral argument on the Roberts court: An empirical examination.” Rutgers LJ 41: 613.Google Scholar
Redding, Richard E. 2003. “ ‘Where did you go to law school?’ Gatekeeping for the professoriate and its implications for legal education.” Journal of Legal Education 53(4): 594–614.Google Scholar
Reingold, Beth. 2003. Representing Women: Sex, Gender, and Legislative Behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Reingold, Beth, Haynie, Kerry L., and Widner, Kirsten. 2020. Race, Gender, and Political Representation: Toward a More Intersectional Approach. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2003. “Gender-related political knowledge and the descriptive representation of women.” Political Behavior 25: 367–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Bailey. 2018. “Partisan bridges to bipartisanship: The case of contraceptive coverage.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 43(3): 521–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Spaeth, Harold J.. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, Maya. 2017. “Diversity, qualifications, and ideology: How female and minority judges have changed, or not changed, over time.” Wis. L. REv., 367.Google Scholar
Stauffer, Katelyn E. 2021. “Public perceptions of women’s inclusion and feelings of political efficacy.” American Political Science Review 115(4): 1226–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stauffer, Katelyn E. 2023. The Politics of Perception: How Women’s Perceived Inclusion Legitimizes Institutions in the U.S.Google Scholar
Stauffer, Katelyn E., and Fisk, Colin A.. 2022. “Are you my candidate? Gender, undervoting, and vote choice in same-party matchups.” Politics & Gender 18(3): 575–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strickland, James M., and Stauffer, Katelyn E.. 2022. “Legislative diversity and the rise of women lobbyists.” Political Research Quarterly 75(3): 531–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swers, Michele L. 2016. “Women & legislative leadership in the US Congress: Representing women’s interests in partisan times.” Daedalus 145(3): 44–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swers, Michele L. 2019. Women in the Club: Gender and Policy Making in the Senate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Szmer, John, Kaheny, Erin B., Sarver, Tammy, and DeCamillis, Mason. 2013. “The impact of attorney gender on decision making in the United States Courts of Appeals.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 34(1): 72–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szmer, John J., Kaheny, Erin B., and Christensen, Robert K.. 2014. “Taking a dip in the Supreme Court clerk pool: Gender-based discrepancies in clerk selection.” Marq. L. Rev. 98: 261.Google Scholar
Tajfel, Henri, and Turner, John C.. 1978. “Intergroup behavior.” Introducing Social Psychology 401: 466.Google Scholar
Wolbrecht, Christina. 2010. The Politics of Women’s Rights: Parties, Positions, and Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaretsky, Staci. 2018. “Which Biglaw Firm Is Now Offering $105K Clerkship Bonuses?” https://abovethelaw.com/2018/01/which-biglaw-firm-is-now-offering-105k-clerkship-bonuses/.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Badas et al. supplementary material

Badas et al. supplementary material
Download Badas et al. supplementary material(File)
File 299.8 KB