Selection and Decision-Making in State Supreme Courts: How Feminist Theory Influences Female Judges

Abstract

This paper examines the history that influences the rate at which female justices are elected and appointed to state supreme courts. There are different variables like judicial campaign activity, limited pool, role expectations of women and advocacy that influence the selection process. I pick the states with the earliest history of selecting female justices (Ohio and New Mexico) and the states that selected female justices last (South Dakota and West Virginia) to address some of the variables mentioned above that have influenced the use of feminist jurisprudence on the bench. After selection, I examine if it is possible for said judges to use feminist theories (like liberal feminist theory) in decision-making processes on the bench. Specifically, can we, in fact use feminist theory to understand the decision making of female state Supreme Court justices? For the most part, I find that we can imply that they do and are additionally interested in creating policy and programs based on the decisions made. Does this change with political party affiliation, race and sexual orientation of the female judges? I determine that more research needs to be conducted in this area on the courts of last resort at both the federal and state level.