Judicial reform efforts aimed at rectifying historical gender and racial inequalities understandably focus on increasing the number of women and people of color on the bench. While this is an important program, this Article sheds light on another aspect of the representation problem, which will not necessarily be resolved through greater diversity in judicial appointments. This problem has to do with the understudied and often opaque practices of judicial administration. Through a large-scale empirical study of federal appellate decisions, we examine the distribution of judges along the lines of gender and race across decision panels and find systematic gender and racial imbalances in representation. We argue that these imbalances are most likely a product of disparities in decision reporting; some decisions, which we call judicial dark matter, go unreported, resulting in distortions in the representation of judges in reported cases. This is the first study of the representation and distribution of judges by gender and race across decision panels. Ultimately, our findings suggest that assessing the distribution of legal power and influence across gender and racial groups based on the numbers of judges from these groups may be misleading and may create an inflated sense of the influence of judges from historically underrepresented groups. The diversity reform agenda, then, as it is typically cast in the scholarly literature, the political sphere, and the popular media alike, is incomplete. One cannot hope to understand how representation translates into power nor to remedy demographic power imbalances in the judiciary without attending to the features of judicial administration examined here.
Many disdain the use of consequences in legal interpretation. Yet it turns out that interpreters have long used consequences, particularly...
Following the Supreme Court’s momentous decision last term in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, much of the scholarly discussion has focused on...
Nationwide injunctions keep the Trump administration from violating federal law during the time it would take the US Supreme Court to intervene.
Trump v. United States is so intensely criticized that, in some quarters, it is at risk of being included in the anti-canon. It is alleged to be...
Virtue jurisprudence is an approach to normative legal theory that answers normative questions about law from a perspective that is centred on the...
The Supreme Court’s evisceration of the federal constitutional right to abortion has raised the specter of criminal and civil liability for abortion...
Trump v. United States’s discovery of broad immunity has rendered the presidency more imperial and unaccountable. This Article tackles four questions...
Contrary to previous research and press accounts, we find limited evidence that persons who worked the polls in the past, including the 2020 election...
Until he joined the U.S. government in 1934, Robert H. Jackson had been a lawyer in private practice in Upstate New York who was admitted to the bar...
Although research suggests that countries' colonial experiences are associated with a range of contemporary outcomes, the link between colonial...
CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp.: International Arbitration and Constitutional Avoidance
I suspect that CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd. caught the eye of the Supreme Court because of an interesting constitutional question...
The United States is undergoing a legal realignment, in that salient legal views recently associated with the right are now being espoused by the left...
This essay considers the future of public-private collaboration in the wake of the Murthy v. Missouri litigation, which cast doubt on the...
U.S. states traditionally play a minor role in establishing national security policies, which generally fall within the federal government’s remit...
Suddenly, the term “civil war” is everywhere, from state and federal immigration battles to abortion access to environmental regulation to election...
Noncarceral conviction is a common outcome of criminal court cases: for every individual incarcerated, there are approximately three who were recently...
Almost half of the states in the country have made it harder to get an abortion since the Supreme Court in 2022 overturned the federal right to get an...