Advertisement

Feminist Legal Studies

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 1–24 | Cite as

Justifying Gender Equality on the Bench: WhyDifference Won't Do

  • Kate Malleson
Article

Abstract

The case for gender equality on the bench wouldseem too uncontroversial to requirejustification. Yet the practical realities ofthe slow progress of women towards equality ofparticipation both quantitative and qualitativein the judiciary testifies to the continuingneed to argue the case for change. To date, theprimary rationale for promoting gender equalityhas been that women will bring a uniquecontribution to the bench as a result of theirdifferent life experiences, values andattitudes. Such arguments derived fromdifference theory have had a strong appealsince they appear to give legitimacy to theundervalued attributes traditionally associatedas feminine while also promoting the meritprinciple by claiming to improve the quality ofjustice. However, this article argues thatdifference theory arguments are theoreticallyweak, empirically questionable andstrategically dangerous. Instead, it argues forthe adoption of a rationale for gender equalitybased on equity and legitimacy; that equalparticipation of men and women in the justicesystem is an inherent and essential feature ofa democracy without which the judiciary willlose public confidence. This approach, thoughless immediately appealing, is ultimately moresound.

equality in the judiciary gender difference judicial confidence judicial impartiality women judges 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Abella, R., “The Dynamic Nature of Equality”, in Equality and Judicial Neutrality, ed. S. Martin and K. Mahoney (Toronto: Carswell, 1987).Google Scholar
  2. Abrahamson, S., “The Woman has Robes: Four Questions”, Golden Gate Law Review 14 (1984), 489.Google Scholar
  3. Aliotta, J., “Justice O'Connor and the Equal Protection Clause: A Feminine Voice?”, Judicature 78 (1995), 232.Google Scholar
  4. Allen, D., “Voting Blocs and the Freshman Justice on State Supreme Courts”, West. Pol. Quarterly 44 (1991), 727.Google Scholar
  5. Allen, D. and Wall, D., “The Behaviour ofWomen State Supreme Court Justices: Are they Tokens or Outsiders?”, Justice Systems Journal 12 (1987), 232.Google Scholar
  6. Barwick, H., Burns, J. and Gray, A., Gender Equality in the New Zealand Judicial System: Judges' Perceptions of Gender Issues (Wellington: Joint Working Group on Gender Equity, 1996).Google Scholar
  7. Cooney, S., “Gender and Judicial Selection: Should there be MoreWomen on the Courts?”, Melbourne University Law Review 19 (1993), 20.Google Scholar
  8. Crowe, N., The Effects of Judges' Sex and Race on Judicial Decision Making on the U.S. Courts of Appeals, 198–1999. PhD dissertation, The University of Chicago, Department of Political Science, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. Davis, S., Hair, S. and Songer, D., “Voting Behaviour and Gender on the U.S. Courts of Appeals”, Judicature 77 (1993), 129.Google Scholar
  10. Davis, S., “The Voice of Sandra Day O'Connor”, Judicature 77 (1993), 134.Google Scholar
  11. Fraser, N., Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the 'Postsocialist' Condition (New York: Taylor &; Francis, 1997).Google Scholar
  12. Frug, M.J., “Progressive Feminist Legal Scholarship: CanWe Claim 'A Different Voice'?”, Harvard Women's Law Journal 15 (1992), 37.Google Scholar
  13. Gatfield, G., Without Prejudice: Women in the Law (Wellington: Brookers, 1996).Google Scholar
  14. Genn, H., Paths to Justice (Oxford: Hart, 1999).Google Scholar
  15. Gilligan, C., In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982).Google Scholar
  16. Goldman, S., “Should There be Affirmative Action for the Judiciary?”, Judicature 62 (1979), 489.Google Scholar
  17. Grant, I. and Smith, L., “Gender Representation in the Canadian Judiciary”, in Appointing Judges: Philosophy, Politics and Practice (Ontario: Ontario Law Reform Commission, 1991).Google Scholar
  18. Gottschall, J., “Carter's Judicial Appointments: The Influence of Affirmative Action and Merit Selection on Voting on the US Courts of Appeals”, Judicature 67 (1983), 165.Google Scholar
  19. Gryski, G., Main, E. and Dixon, W., “Models of State High Court Decision Making in Sex Discrimination Cases”, J. Pol. 48 (1986), 143.Google Scholar
  20. Gruhl, J., Spohn, C. and Welch, S., “Women as Policymakers: The Case of Trial Judges”, American Journal of Political Science 25 (1981), 308.Google Scholar
  21. Hale, B., “Equality and the Judiciary: Why Should We Want More Women Judges?”, Public Law (2001), 489.Google Scholar
  22. Kritzer, H. and Uhlman, T., “Sisterhood in the Courtroom: Sex of Judge and Defendant in Criminal Case Disposition”, Social Science Journal 14 (1977), 77.Google Scholar
  23. Lahey, K., “Until Women Themselves Have Told All They Have To Tell”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 23 (1985), 519.Google Scholar
  24. Laster, K. and Douglas, R., “Feminized Justice: The Impact of Women Decision Makers in the Lower Courts in Australia”, Justice Quarterly 12 (1995), 177.Google Scholar
  25. Marshall, T., “Public Opinion and U.S. Supreme Coutt Decision-Making in Women's Rights Cases”, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association. Chicago, IL (1995).Google Scholar
  26. Martin, E., “The Representative Role of Women Judges”, Judicature 77 (1993), 66.Google Scholar
  27. McCormick, P. and Job, T., “Do Women Judges Make a Difference? An Analysis by Appeal Court Data”, Canadian Journal of Law and Society 8 (1993), 135.Google Scholar
  28. McGlynn, C., The Woman Lawyer: Making the Difference (London: Butterworths, 1998).Google Scholar
  29. McRae, S., Women at the Top (London: The Hansard Society, 1996).Google Scholar
  30. Menkel-Meadow, C., “The Comparative Sociology of Women Lawyers: The 'Feminisation' of the Legal Profession”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 24 (1986), 897.Google Scholar
  31. Naylor, B., Gender and Sentencing in the Victorian Magistrates' Court: A Pilot Project (Canberra: Criminological Research Council, 1992).Google Scholar
  32. O'Connor, D., “Portia's Progress”, New York University Law Review 66 (1991), 1546.Google Scholar
  33. Phillips, A., The Politics of Presence (Oxford: Clarendon, 1995).Google Scholar
  34. Pitkin, H., The Concept of Representation (Berkley: California, 1967).Google Scholar
  35. Raday, F., “Women in Law in Israel”, Georgia State University Law Review 12 (1996), 525.Google Scholar
  36. Resnik, J., “On the Bias: Feminist Reconsideration of the Aspirations for our Judges', South California Law Review 61 (1988), 1877.Google Scholar
  37. Roach Anleu, S., “Women in Law: Theory, Research and Practice”, Australia and New Zealand J. Stats. 28 (1992), 391.Google Scholar
  38. Russell, O., “Judicial Free Speech: Justifiable Limits”, N.B.U. Law Review 45 (1996), 156.Google Scholar
  39. Segal, J., “The Decision Making of Clinton's Nontraditional Judicial Appointees”, Judicature 80 (1997), 279.Google Scholar
  40. Sherry, S., “The Gender of Judges”, Law and Inequality 4 (1986), 159.Google Scholar
  41. Shientag, B., “The Virtue of Impartiality”, in Handbook for Judges, ed. G. Winters (American Judicature Society, 1975).Google Scholar
  42. Slotnick, E., “Gender, Affirmative Action and Recruitment to the Federal Bench”, Golden Gate Law Review 14 (1984), 519.Google Scholar
  43. Sommerlad, H. and Sanderson, P., Gender, Choice and Commitment: Women Solicitors in England and Wales and the Struggle for Equal Status (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1998).Google Scholar
  44. Songer, D. and Crews-Meyer, K., “Does Judge Gender Matter? Decision Making in State Supreme Court”, Social Science Quarterly 81/3 (2000), 750.Google Scholar
  45. Steffensmeier, D. and Hebert, C., “Women and Men Policymakers: Does the Judge's Gender Affect the Sentencing of Criminal Defendants?”, Social Forces 77 (1999), 1163.Google Scholar
  46. Thornton, M., Dissonance and Distrust: Women in the Legal Profession (Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  47. Ward, D., Still Hearing Voices: The Persistent Myth of Gendered Judgment. VIIth Biennial Conference of the International Society for Justice Research, College of Management, Rishon Lezion, Israel, 2000.Google Scholar
  48. Wikler, N.J., “Identifying and Correcting Judicial Gender Bias”, in Equality and Judicial Neutrality, eds. S. Martin and K. Mahoney (Toronto: Carswell, 1987).Google Scholar
  49. Wilson, B., “WillWomen Judges Really Make a Difference?”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 28 (1990), 507.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kate Malleson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations