Gender, the United States Courts of Appeals, and the Supreme Court: The emergence of a feminine perspective

The existing literature on the influence of gender on judicial decision making is inconclusive. I argue that the mixed results may be a result of how there is little consistency concerning the policy areas previous research has examined and that previous studies employ different statistical models to test the effect gender has on judicial decision making. This research is an effort to overcome both of these limitations by systematically examining the role gender plays across judicial institutions, namely the U.S. Courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court. In general, I find that gender influences judicial decision making in several policy areas in the Supreme Court and that the effect of gender on courts of appeals judges is multi-dimensional. In an effort to assess whether a feminine jurisprudence emerges in the opinion writing process, I examine opinions written by Justices O'Connor, Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Souter. I find that the two women to serve on the Supreme Court are more likely than Justices Kennedy or Souter to use a feminine perspective towards law. Interestingly, my research suggests that a feminine perspective towards law is not only limited to women. Overall, the current study adds to the existing literature by systematically examining the role gender plays in judicial decision making across institutions.