| |
| |
Foreword | |
| |
| |
Preface | |
| |
| |
Acknowledgments | |
| |
| |
| |
Introduction: Gender as a Social Process | |
| |
| |
What�s the Problem? Why So Few Women? | |
| |
| |
Once We Find Women We Fall into Looking for Difference | |
| |
| |
Women Judges Largely Reject Framing Themselves as Different | |
| |
| |
Feminist Theory's Detour into Difference | |
| |
| |
Women Judges Signify Both Business as Usual and Radical Transformation Simultaneously | |
| |
| |
The Dangers of Difference | |
| |
| |
Individuals Matter; Life Experiences Matter | |
| |
| |
Moving from Sex as a Variable that Uncovers Difference to Gender as a Social Process | |
| |
| |
A Woman Who Will Get to Decide Cases | |
| |
| |
From Describing Women to Gendering Concepts: The Plan of the Book | |
| |
| |
| |
Gender, Judging, and Difference | |
| |
| |
Introduction | |
| |
| |
Has Gender Replaced Sex? Is It a Noun, an Adjective, or a Verb? | |
| |
| |
Using Sex as a Variable Can Uncover Discrimination | |
| |
| |
Using Sex as a Variable to Determine whether Women Judge Differently from Men | |
| |
| |
Studies of Other Effects of Women on the Bench | |
| |
| |
Conclusion | |
| |
| |
| |
Mobilizing Emotions: The Case of Rosalie Wahl and the Minnesota Supreme Court | |
| |
| |
Women and state Supreme Courts: Policy Diffusion and Norms | |
| |
| |
The Symbolic Politics of Judicial Appointments | |
| |
| |
The Case of Rosalie Wahl | |
| |
| |
Wahl as Symbol | |
| |
| |
Conclusion | |
| |
| |
| |
Strategic Partnerships and Women on the Federal Bench | |
| |
| |
Feminists Engage the State | |
| |
| |
Carter Puts Gender on the Agenda | |
| |
| |
Feminist Policy Achievements | |
| |
| |
The Issue of Judicial Selection | |
| |
| |
Carter and Feminists | |
| |
| |
After Carter | |
| |
| |
| |
Gender on the Agenda: Lessons from the United Kingdom | |
| |
| |
Introduction | |
| |
| |
The Concept of Agenda-Setting | |
| |
| |
Was the Absence of Women a Problem? | |
| |
| |
Changes that Created a More Receptive Climate | |
| |
| |
The Lord Chancellor and Legal Profession Are Gatekeepers that Keep Out Women | |
| |
| |
Reform of the Judicial Selection Process | |
| |
| |
Litigation Helps Change the Discourse and Reframe the Issue | |
| |
| |
Conclusion: Reforming the Process, Disappointing Results | |
| |
| |
| |
A Case for Representation: The European Court of Justice | |
| |
| |
A Gender Theory of a Representative Judiciary | |
| |
| |
History of Judicial Appointments to the European Court of Justice | |
| |
| |
The First Women Members | |
| |
| |
The European Parliament Champions the Appointment of Women | |
| |
| |
Developments Post-1995 | |
| |
| |
Litigation Frames Women's Absence as Discrimination | |
| |
| |
Making Gender Representation an Explicit Requirement | |
| |
| |
Organizing and Mobilizing for Women | |
| |
| |
Representation and the Judiciary | |
| |
| |
Conclusion | |
| |
| |
| |
Backlash against Women Judges | |
| |
| |
The Concept of Backlash | |
| |
| |
The Five Kinds of Backlash against Women Judges | |
| |
| |
The Case of Rose Bird | |
| |
| |
The Rise of Chief Justice Rose Bird | |
| |
| |
The Reaction to Birds Appointment | |
| |
| |
Understanding Bird's Downfall | |
| |
| |
The Role that Gender Played | |
| |
| |
Conclusion | |
| |
| |
| |
Conclusion: Drawing on the History of Women's Exclusion from Juries to Make the Case for a Gender-Diverse Judiciary | |
| |
| |
Women's Exclusion from Juries: A Woman's Flavor? | |
| |
| |
The Case for a Gender-Diverse Bench | |
| |
| |
Conclusion | |
| |
| |
Notes | |
| |
| |
Bibliography | |
| |
| |
Index | |