The method a state uses to choose judges can significantly influence when the first woman is appointed to its highest court.
Appointment Power Structure: Does concentrating judicial appointment power in one person or spreading it accelerate gender diversity?
Our analysis suggests that specific constitutional reforms targeting selection mechanisms have measurable effects on promoting women's representation among chief justices and justices of state supreme courts. These findings challenge claims that minor procedural changes don't impact diversity outcomes.
Research Design & Methods: We employed a matched-pair approach using the principles behind the Rosenbaum permutation model against a global dataset spanning from 1970 onward.
This allowed us to isolate the influence of constitutional reform on timing patterns, controlling for various external factors that might otherwise skew results. States were paired based on similar characteristics and then compared post-constitutional change.
Key Findings: The evidence indicates judicial selection processes evolve in meaningful ways over time toward greater gender diversity among top judges.
Constitutional changes appear to directly impact the timeline, with states implementing reforms experiencing faster appointment of women to their highest courts.
Why This Matters: These results show targeted institutional reforms can actively promote change in representation.
Understanding how constitutional modifications affect judicial composition helps scholars and policymakers address persistent gender gaps in political institutions.
| Constitutional Reform and the Gender Diversification of Peak Courts was authored by Nancy Arrington, Leeann Bass, Adam Glynn, Jeffrey K. Staton, Brian Delgado and Staffan I. Lindberg. It was published by Cambridge in APSR in 2021. |
