Judges’ race, gender, and politics measurably shift their case outcomes

Evidence

Using this framework, Cohen and Yang (2019) find that political affiliation of judges has an impact on their decisions. The authors find that Republican-appointed federal judges are harsher against Black defendants and are more lenient toward female defendants in comparison to judges appointed by Democrats. Similarly, analyzing data from the U.S. Courts of Appeals, Sunstein and colleagues (2006) showed that judges who were Democratic appointees voted—in political elections—in a more liberal fashion in comparison to judges who were appointed by Republicans. Glynn and Sen (2015) found that appellate court judges who have daughters consistently voted in a feminist direction. Knepper (2018) found that female plaintiffs who filed sex discrimination cases with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission were more likely to win their cases in federal district courts if a female judge was assigned to the case. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 750

Categorization

• SHARE: The Glynn and Sen finding that appellate judges with daughters vote feminist is a delightfully specific datum
• XREF: Sits within the reader’s conviction-vs-measured-bias research: judges’ demographic traits translate into measurable sentencing divergence despite egalitarian institutional norms. — connects to: Judges’ values and discretion mean who sits matters for outcomes — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 499; Regional political culture shapes the attitudes judges bring to the bench — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2576; Judges bring consistent long-established political views to the bench — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2572 (+2 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 750