Race, gender and age affect who writes majority opinions for state supreme courts

March 13, 2019 by Todd Hollingshead, Brigham Young University
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

A new study provides evidence that the gender, age and race of state supreme court justices may influence whether they are asked to write the majority opinion in a case.

The analysis of three years' worth of cases from the fourteen states where the opinion assignment is discretionary, just like the United States Supreme Court, (rather than being assigned randomly or on a rotation) found the following:

  • Female justices are more likely to be assigned to write an opinion in general, but they are less likely to be selected to write the opinion if a case is considered complex.
  • Female justices are more likely to be selected to write the if the case raises a "women's issue," such as or discrimination cases.
  • Both female and black justices are less likely to be selected to write the majority opinion as they get older while their non-minority male peers are selected for this task at higher rates with advancing age.

"Majority opinion authors have significant power to shape law and policy," said coauthor Robert K. Christensen, associate professor of public service and ethics at Brigham Young University. "They become the voice of the . We feel that society needs to understand which voices are chosen from a variety of perspectives, including demographic representation."

Specific to the age finding, researchers also found female justices between 40 and 60 are less likely to be given the majority opinion assignment with each additional year in age relative to their male peers. Meanwhile, black justices become significantly less likely to receive the majority opinion assignment with each year in age starting in their mid-sixties.

The researchers acknowledge that research on gender, age and race effects in state supreme courts needs to continue on a broader and more recent time frame, especially given only 6.5 percent of the judges in the data set were black (compared to 15 percent who were female). Until recently, the judiciary has generally become more diverse. This study serves as an important baseline to compare how diversity matters in our courts. In related research, the coauthors also found that some of these same demographic characteristics influence the prevalence of dissenting opinions.

BYU Law professor Michalyn Steele, who was not associated with the study but teaches courses on and Federal Indian Law, said wherever there is discretion in the justice system there is a potential vulnerability to bias—whether conscious or unconscious.

"This important study shines a light on the previously obscure machinations of discretionary judicial assignments and suggests that, indeed, there may be some implicit biases infecting those assignments," Steele said. "Gathering and illuminating this data is an important first step toward increased transparency to counteract the potential inherent bias in theses cases."

Explore further: Bias found in state supreme courts, according to UGA study

More information: Erin B. Kaheny et al, Status characteristics and their intersectionality: majority opinion assignment in state supreme courts, Politics, Groups, and Identities (2019). DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2019.1569538

Related Stories

Bias found in state supreme courts, according to UGA study

May 31, 2012

The assignment to write a court's majority opinion is one of the major tools for shaping judicial and, consequently, public policy. Researchers at the University of Georgia, along with the University of North Carolina at ...

What moves the Supreme Court's 'swing' justices?

November 1, 2013

Whenever the U.S. Supreme Court hands down a 5-4 decision, the pivotal "swing" vote must be cast by the "median" justice (midway, ideologically, between four more liberal justices and four more conservative), right?

Justices meet Friday to vote on health care case

March 29, 2012

(AP) -- While the rest of us have to wait until June, the justices of the Supreme Court will know the likely outcome of the historic health care case by the time they go home this weekend.

California high court: Yelp can't be ordered to remove posts

July 2, 2018

Online review site Yelp.com cannot be ordered to remove posts against a San Francisco law firm that a judge determined were defamatory, a divided California Supreme Court ruled Monday in a closely watched case that internet ...

Recommended for you

Study reveals properties of a Type Ib supernova in NGC 4080

March 25, 2019

A recent study conducted by astronomers has revealed important observational properties of a Type Ib supernova designated MASTER OT J120451.50+265946.6, which exploded in the galaxy NGC 4080. The research, presented in a ...

Catalyst advance removes pollutants at low temperatures

March 25, 2019

Researchers at Washington State University, University of New Mexico, Eindhoven University of Technology, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory have developed a catalyst that can both withstand high temperatures and convert ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.