A judge's race or gender makes for a dramatic difference in the outcome of cases they hear—at least for cases in which race and gender allegedly play a role in the conduct of the parties, according to two recent studies.
The results were the focus of a program about “Diversity on the Bench: Is the ‘Wise Latina’ a Myth?,” sponsored by the ABA Judicial Division at the ABA Midyear Meeting in Orlando on Saturday afternoon.
In federal racial harassment cases, one study (PDF) found that plaintiffs lost just 54 percent of the time when the judge handling the case was an African-American. Yet plaintiffs lost 81 percent of the time when the judge was Hispanic, 79 percent when the judge was white, and 67 percent of the time when the judge was Asian American.
The comprehensive study, by professors from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and Carnegie Mellon University's Tepper School of Business, examined a random assortment of 40 percent of all reported racial harassment cases from six federal circuits between 1981 and 2003.
A second study (PDF), looked at 556 federal appellate cases involving allegations of sexual harassment or sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The finding: plaintiffs were at least twice as likely to win if a female judge was on the appellate panel.
University of Pittsburgh School of Law Professor Pat K. Chew, who co-authored the racial harassment study, said she found “the rule of law is intact” in the cases she reviewed. Judges—no matter which side they ruled for—took the same procedural steps to reach their decisions, she said.
But judges of different races took different approaches “on how to interpret the facts of the cases,” she said.
Pressed on whether the rule of law could actually be considered intact when outcomes varied so much depending on the race of the judge, she replied: "It’s always made a difference who the judge was. We’ve long known, for instance, that a judge’s political affiliation makes a difference."
Judge Carol E. Jackson of U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri said she was heartened that diversity has crept into the federal court system, where today 20 percent of judges are women and 15 percent are members of minority groups.
"It’s important that different voices are being heard," she said.
The program took its title from a much-debated comment made years ago by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor : “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
The participants never answered the question of whether a Latina judge reaches better conclusions, but at least in some cases, it appears likely that she would reach a different conclusion from a white male jurist hearing the same evidence.
24 comments:
The judges might be more inclined to take sides in which race and gender are involved; but, not only race and gender make a difference. Anything can. Doesn't a judge of opinions in any case? I think the same issue is present here.
Judge Jackson is absolutely correct when she says that diversity is a good thing in the federal court system. It seems strange that diversity for judges is a concern when diversity is usually sought after for jurys. Whats the difference? They are both deciding factors for the outcome of a case and different views should be considered a good thing. It even says in the article that the judges are following all the same procedures so if they are following the law, there should be no issue.
There will always be bias as long as there are differences among us. Our uniqueness is both our blessing and our curse. The decision made by a judge or jury will always be disliked because someone has to lose.
It seems very unfair that a trial's outcome may depend on the judge's race or sex. Yet any individual's decision on anything in life will be somewhat biased due to family background, lifestyle, ethnicity, race, gender, etc. So while judges should attempt to maintain a neutral stance during court cases it seems impossible to do so as they might even personally connect with a case in their court. This study illustrates that even though characteristics such as gender and race affect a trial, Pat K. Chew says that "The rule of law is intact." Cool blog :)
It appears to me that the race and the sex of the judge trying the case has an impact on the outcome. Where as in the past judges were mostly white males and therefore tended to side with the white race. Now that there are women and minorities on the bench things seem to be more in favor of the minorities.
It disturbs me that, though we've come so far as a unified nation in the past decades, there are still problems of racism. It is especially disturbing that they seem predominant in the Justice system. The court room, of all places in the United States, should be the very place that race and ethnicity should take a backseat. The Judge, most of all, should go into a case blind to everything (color, ethincity, religion, political views) as he hears the details of the case in question. I believe that in coming to live in America from another country, you embrace that fact that you are first and foremost American and that your loyalties lie with this country and its foundations. If you choose to live and thrive in this country, you should support it completely and without racial and ethnic ties to another.
You know people will always find a way to make some type of racial things out of something. In this case its actually a huge major role in our judicial view. What judges need to do is just not get way into the case to where race does not really affect their judgement, and more of the real outcome should come from a mixed group of jury. In either case really allow the jury to attain more say in court cases so some trials are not looked down upon simple because of the judges racial background.
I don't think that a person's race is such a big deal if they are a judge. there are other factors besides the color of their skin that determine how they will rule on the case. they could have made a study about religion to see which one had a higher chance of losing their case, it would have been the same thing. Everyone's way of thinking is different becasue of their experiences and because of their backgrounds. So no matter what race a person is, there will always be some sort of diversity.
I think it's very important to have diversity in our federal court system. It makes all the difference in some cases that the judge knows where each side is coming from and is able to look further into than just what is printed on their legal documents. It is not okay, however, for them to get personally attached to one side or the other because of the race or gender. The law is the law and should be especially followed here. Someone should be holding those judges accountable for the "dramatic difference" they allow in court cases.
i think it is rather important to have judges of different ethnic backgrounds. In this country, we are all about cultural diversity so why should the same be applied to our justice system?
There is no doubt that race can have an effect on the decisions of judges. Race can determine how people were rased, the cultures in which they were rased, and the morals and values they were rased on. That in itself will affect a judges decision almost every time. We really cant help that, and it would be wrong to try to change this in any way for the better. Think about the ways you could change it. Make all judges one race and sex and all be raised the same way. Thats not going to work. And its unconstitutional. Just let this ride. Besides, alot of studies are just plain wrong.
I think the results of the studies are disappointing considering that our judges are supposed to have no predispositions towards any person, race, or gender. I do see how people could have leanings toward their own group, most do, but when you are making decisions on peoples lives then you should do your utmost to mask those feelings.
It's is very understandable that people from different backgrounds look and interpret situations defferently from someone who didn't expirence things like they had. That is a evident fact with everyone because we never fully understand where someone else stands till we have been put in their shoes. Although in the justice system everyone is supposed to be biased to make things fair but it is always difficult to look past personal expirence and not apply that to the rest of your life. This is a double edged sword.
Well I understand why Sotomayor would make that comment. The two would obviously have different experiences and lives. Its a good point that depending on the race will have a result since all are different.
The race and gender of a judge isnt something I have much thought about. It is extremely discomforting to know that are legal system can and is corrupted by personal bias. How can any single person be expected to make a completely fair and unprejudice decision in a world sperated by so many various groups of people. Perheps the legal system would be more accurate with more than one judge per case.
It is disturbing that such powerful authorities make bias decisions. Their choices have major effects on people's lives but can be so easily steered in the wrong direction because of personal prejudice. How can our society thrive with a legal sytem that is partially blind to the truth. Perhaps no single person should be expected to make a perfectly fair decision with such a racially divide wolrd and country. I guesss the world will continue to wait for a day when such trivial matters no longer apply.
I think that it is important to point out that hispanic is not a race. This article is dumb.
Racial harassment is too big a term. Did the study look at harassment of plantiffs of the same ethnic groups as the judge? That would be the near the same thing as the sexual harassment study. I don't quite get how these studie tie into the wise Latina comment. I think Sonia Sotomayor was talking about multiple parts of her life experience, not just her ethnicity and gender. For example, growing up in project housing. Reducing her statment into two categories is just plain stupid. P.S. I'm having tech dificulties on this site, I know I used my last name and period number when I signed in, but it's not working now, sorry all.
i am kinda tired of race being such a big factor in the world today but there is no use of ignoring it because it is always going to be a problem.the fact that people are finding judges to be unfair or kinda like leaning more on the side of their own color isnt right.well it isnt of course but the judge is looking from her/his point of view in it may seem like it is that way,and sometimes it may be they r jus going with their own race cuz they are discriminating.such as Sotomayor claiming that certain races have been through different situations and have grown up and learned things differently so the outcome is going come out diff. based on past experiences.for that the people need to stop thinking about race even though that is never going to happen and mainly think about the case because that is the main focus,unless it was like gang related were race is the problem.
I'm not sure this study is 100% effective... Unless you sent the same mock cases to all these judges its not really fair to say that this is all due to race or gender. It's more than likely that one judge who happened to be black recieved more cases that were obviously wanting of the same verdict.
I think that people might complain until they needed a judge who understood where they were coming from simply because of race. However, I do not think that any judge, not matter what race or ethnicity, should simply let their race or ethnicity be the deciding factor for any case what-so-ever! I think that all judges should be able to keep their biases in check, and if they can't, then they shouldn't be a judge!
I have mixed feelings when I read this article. On one hand I think yeah the fact that our Judicial system has evolved to be so diverse, I am also saddened by the amount of racism that is still prestent in our society. I agree with katie completely that we select judges based on their ability to judge fairly with no outside influence. No matter their own situtation they should rule according to what is presented to them in the courtroom.
I think its very important to have diversity in our court system. However I think the diversity needs to be mostly focused in the Jury. But also, no matter how hard we try and how diverse everyone is, I think there will always be prejudice. Its just human nature.
No court decision SHOULD be made based on gender, religion, race, etc. However, this doesn't change the fact that all decisions WILL be made based on some aspect of personal bias. Judges are simply human and so, even though they try to keep a neutral stance on their cases, everyone has different opinions based on their individual background and history.
Post a Comment