The 'Blinded' Scales of Justice? A Study of the Factors that Influence Judicial Decision-Making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Open Access
Author:
Lane, Erin Rose
Area of Honors:
Political Science
Degree:
Bachelor of Arts
Document Type:
Thesis
Thesis Supervisors:
Christopher Zorn, Thesis Supervisor Matthew Richard Golder, Thesis Honors Advisor
Keywords:
Political Science Judicial Behavior Disparate Impact Courts Appellate Courts
Abstract:
What factors influence judicial-decision making in disparate impact related cases in the U.S. Courts of Appeals? Previous research focuses on either individual judge or panel composition effects, but doesn’t focus on both. Many researchers focus on differing factors, whether that be ideology, race, sex, or age, but don’t include all in their analyses. While previous research also has not been updated into recent years. Disparate impact related cases provide a perfect opportunity to study judicial decision-making due to federal laws and conflicting court precedents that research suggests allows judges to vote within their preferences. Two logistic regressions were utilized to determine which factors influence individual judges and overall panel voting in the appellate courts of the United States. While in both the individual and panel composition multiple variate analyses, ideology of the judge was significant and is influential in decision-making. Whether or not the case was decided before or after 1991 was found significant in the individual judge multivariate analysis. In the United States, federal judges are granted lifetime appointment once they are confirmed to their position, with very few judges ever getting impeached. Understanding what factors influence judicial decision-making in the appellate courts, especially in disparate impact related cases, can help shine a light to the American people that our judicial system is not as unbiased as we tend to believe. It could also help future plaintiffs in disparate impact cases understand their likelihood of success.
