![]() As Scola concludes in a study of intersectional legislative representation, “The process seems to be more complex than what is captured by race/ethnicity or gender separately” ( 2013, 344). Scholars have noted in other contexts that the double disadvantage women of color experience conditions the relationship between institutions and representation. ![]() In contrast, intersectionality research “emphasizes the interaction of categories of difference (including but not limited to race, gender, class, and sexual orientation” ( Hancock 2007, 63–64). As one state judge put it, “Women of color in the justice system of our nation, whether judge, attorney, or court staff suffer a double disadvantage-gender discrimination and ethnic bias” ( Aranda 1996, 29).Īlthough the study of state judicial diversification is thriving (e.g., Arrington 2018 Bratton and Spill 2002 Goelzhauser 2016 Graham 1990 Hurwitz and Lanier 2003 Reddick, Nelson, and Caufield 2009), much of it emphasizes single-axis representation, particularly the separate seating of women and people of color. ![]() An American Bar Association ( 2006) survey reports, for example, that lawyers who are women of color are more likely to face workplace harassment, receive insufficient professional mentoring, be denied high-profile client assignments, and receive negative performance evaluations. But women of color face unique hurdles to equal professional treatment (see, e.g., Blackburne-Rigsby 2010 Burleigh 1988 Collins, Dumas and Moyer 2017 Smith 1997). The legal profession’s history of discrimination against women and people of color is well documented. Chapter 1: Actors in the Judicial Processġ.3 Intersectional Representation on State Supreme Courts
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |