| |
| |
| 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 | |