There may remain a concern that substantive differences in decision-making might not result in greater fairness but will somehow corrupt the law. Introduction There has been significant attention paid in England and Wales in recent years to the need for greater judicial diversity; in particular, the need to appoint more women judges.
Analyzing the text is very much like doing literary analysis, which many students have done before. What is the exigence events in this moment in time which affect the need for this conversation that makes the audience interested in this issue?
It must be conceded, however, that the evidence provided by the feminist judgment projects is restricted. I used to be quite sceptical about these arguments that it made a difference. Circuit Court equivalent In other words, judicial conversations are not confined to appellate courts, and the potential influence of non-traditional judges may extend to the judgments of other judges in other cases as well as their own.
For example, the English project includes cases on property law concepts, 67 commercial contracts, 68 adult social care, 69 minority sexual practices, 70 and medical decision-making 71 which apply feminist theory to less obvious subject matters. Secondly, a quote from one of the Australian judicial interviewees is illuminating: Lastly, she may write a joint judgment or leading judgment with which other members of the court agree, because her reasoning is persuasive.
The students correctly identified the gender of the judge about half the time, and were incorrect half the time. Since then, dozens if not hundreds of articles and reports have been written on that topic.
Magistrates and Crown Court equivalents. It is informed by feminist theories and an understanding of gendered experience, but this may result, as indicated in the quote from Kenney above, in a range of approaches, including noticing the gender implications of apparently neutral rules and practices, challenging gender bias in legal doctrine and judicial reasoning, or promoting substantive equality.
In such a system, the viewpoints and alignments on the court become predictable and somewhat solidified. Some of these women judges said they were feminists but not feminist judges. Advanced Search Abstract This article addresses a key question in debates around judicial diversity: All but one of the interviewees were women.
In other words they provide many, many protections for the accused person, as they should. I mean … at the end of the day the individual person is stuck with the individual judge that they get. Magistrates Court The notion of applying the law bravely is not one which is often spoken about in our legal culture.
First, there may be little scope for any form of judicial activism at the court level or within the jurisdiction in which the judge is sitting. When might we expect those judges to judge differently? The questions asked by Lord Neuberger and Lord Pannick, however, demonstrate an ongoing concern, and a lack of clarity and certainty, as to whether a more diverse judiciary will make a difference to substantive decision-making, and if so, how and when such a difference might be made.
Likewise, the Australian project includes cases on voting rights, 72 the right to a fair trial for indigent defendants, 73 environmental law, 74 and consumer protection. Much of this literature has been generated within the political science discipline in the USA, and has usually involved large-scale databases of decisions made by State or Federal benches, with statistical tests for the significance of judicial gender as an independent variable explaining the outcomes of cases.
Perhaps, it ought to be. Thus, the achievements of these imagined feminist judges can only take us so far, and it is necessary to turn to the practices of real judges who are subject to the full range of constraints identified above.
It then turns to consider the considerable evidence which now exists both to refute and to support the existence of substantive differences in decision-making following the appointment to the judiciary of women and others from non-traditional backgrounds.
You judge on the criteria that you are supposed to judge [on]. Reader How would they react to these arguments? First, there is the quantitative empirical literature which has sought to establish whether or not women judges make a difference. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical.
Expectations A third factor which might influence when non-traditional judges may make a substantive difference in decision-making is the expectations attaching to their role.
In accordance with this view, some feminist legal theorists have argued that law is impervious to a feminist approach, that it is in the business of disqualifying rather than embracing feminist knowledge, 40 and that it provides no space for a judgment which is at once informed by a feminist perspective and legally plausible.
This points to one of the strengths of the way the UK Supreme Court operates compared to other countries, where the highest appellate court always sits en banc. In the remainder of this article, I shall investigate in more detail and in a more nuanced way the argument that the identity of the judge might make a substantive difference to judicial reasoning and decision-making.
The questions asked by Lord Neuberger and Lord Pannick, however, demonstrate an ongoing concern, and a lack of clarity and certainty, as to whether a more diverse judiciary will make a difference to substantive decision-making, and if so, how and when such a difference might be made.
Much of this literature has been generated within the political science discipline in the USA, and has usually involved large-scale databases of decisions made by State or Federal benches, with statistical tests for the significance of judicial gender as an independent variable explaining the outcomes of cases.
Lastly, she may write a joint judgment or leading judgment with which other members of the court agree, because her reasoning is persuasive. Further, it appears that the majority of cases at all court levels and in all jurisdictions other, perhaps, than in family law simply do not raise any gender or feminist issues.
In other words they provide many, many protections for the accused person, as they should. To summarize the literature in a short space, there are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. Text How is the essay organized?The article concludes by considering implications for refugee policy and for research on gender and judging.
Do Women Refugee Judges Really Make a Difference? An Empirical Analysis of Gender and Outcomes in Canadian Refugee Determinations | Canadian Journal of Women and the Law. Aug 16, · Men and Women in Conversation: Example response essay to Deborah Tannen's article about how divorce can be prevented if people learn the communication signals of the opposite gender.
Response Essay about Getting a Tattoo: Responds to a personal experience article from the New York Times about a man who gets a dragon librariavagalume.coms: She argues that the addition of more women to the bench could make a difference in the law, if " women judges, through their differing perspectives on life, can bring new humanity to bear on the decision-making process " (Wilson).
Rehaag, Sean, Do Women Refugee Judges Really Make a Difference? An Empirical Analysis of Gender and Outcomes in Canadian Refugee Determinations (November 23, ). Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, Vol.
23, p. biography really make a difference? There is a lot of stereotyping around female judges, minority judges, old or young judges, rural or metropolitan background, and professors.
Wilson, Bertha. "Will Women Judges Really Make a Difference?."Osgoode Hall Law Journal (): these women judges will bring to bear the same neutrality and impartiality.
However, if you conclude that the existing law, in some reflection, and critical analysis which had served them so well with respect to other .Download