The Effects of Race and Gender on the Judicial Ambitions of State Trial Court Judges

• Author: Jennifer M. Jensen,Wendy L. Martinek
• Published date: 01 June 2009
• Date: 01 June 2009
• DOI: 10.1177/1065912908319574
• Subject Matter: Articles

Political Research Quarterly
Volume 62 Number 2
June 2009 379-392
© 2009 University of Utah
The Effects of Race and Gender
10.1177/1065912908319574
http://prq.sagepub.com
on the Judicial Ambitions of State
hosted at
http://online.sagepub.com
Trial Court Judges
Jennifer M. Jensen
Wendy L. Martinek
Binghamton University (SUNY), New York
The intersection of gender—and to a lesser extent, race—and political ambition has been the subject of considerable
research. To date, however, analyses of the intersection of political ambition, race, and gender in the context of the
judiciary have been limited. The authors seek to remedy this deficiency with the use of data from a recent survey of
justices of the New York State Supreme Court, the major trial court in the State of New York. They find that female
and nonwhite justices have a greater desire to move up in a judicial career than do their white male counterparts.
Keywords:
judges; ambition; gender; race; trial courts
The political ambitions of actual and aspiring office in the courts. Although the judiciary is not designed
holders serve an important function in the democ-
as a democratic institution, and debates about the
ratic process: “Ambition for office is the raw material
extent to which descriptive representation is a prereq-
of politics, the grist whereby electoral competition and
uisite for substantive representation notwithstanding
office holders’ accountability is assured. It lies at the
(Bratton and Haynie 1999; Mansbridge 1999), there
heart of our understanding of democratic theory,
remain ample reasons to be concerned about the
explaining when, why, and how political elites respond
numeric underrepresentation of women and minori-
to citizen interests” (Maestas et al. 2006, 195). Much
ties in public office, including threats to institutional
of the extant literature regarding political ambition has
legitimacy (Thomas 1998) and the effect of nontradi-
centered on the legislative arena (e.g., Bratton and
tional candidates and officeholders on citizens’ levels
Haynie 1999; Fulton et al. 2006; Moncrief, Squire, and
Jewell 2001; Rohde 1979; Squire 1988), though there
Jennifer M. Jensen, Assistant Professor of Political Science,
have also been informative studies of political ambi-
Binghamton University (SUNY); e-mail:jjensen@binghamton.edu.
tion focused on statewide offices (Schlesinger 1966),
Wendy L. Martinek, Associate Professor of Political Science,
local offices (Black 1972), and political activists
Binghamton University (SUNY); e-mail: martinek@binghamton
(Costantini 1990). By comparison, investigations of
.edu.
political ambition in the context of the judiciary have
Authors’ Note: We thank Margaret Williams for sharing her sur-
been limited in number (e.g., Williams 2008). This is a
vey of attorneys and judges in the state of Texas, and Steven
regrettable deficiency. Courts are not legislatures, and
Spindler and Tracy Jensen for their suggestions regarding the sur-
judges are not legislators. The pursuit of political ends
vey instrument. We also thank Paola Fajardo and Geoffrey
and the expression of political preferences differ in
McGovern for their research assistance, and Adriana Buliga-
Stoian, Raymond Carman, Conor Dowling, Ian Farrell, and Eric
meaningful ways depending on the venue. Furthermore,
Schwartz for their help with the survey mailing process. Earlier
legislatures and courts are intended to fulfill different
versions of this article were presented at the Annual Meeting of
social and political functions; hence, what we know
the Southern Political Science Association, New Orleans,
about political ambition in legislatures may not apply
Louisiana, January 4-6, 2007, and the 7th Annual State Politics
in courts.
and Policy Conference, Austin, Texas, February 22-24, 2007. We
Political ambition is likewise important for under-
thank the panelists and participants at these programs—
especially Kathleen Bratton, Drew Lanier Noble, Hannah
standing descriptive representation in the courts.1
Holden, and Tom Carsey—for their comments and suggestions.
Politicians and legal reformers have become increas-
Finally, we thank the New York State Supreme Court justices
ingly sensitive to issues of gender and racial diversity
who completed the survey that is at the heart of this study.
379

---

380
Political Research Quarterly
of political interest and political activism (Campbell
women were traditionally excluded from office
and Wolbrecht 2006). As there is also considerable
(Darcy, Welch, and Clark 1994). A complementary
debate over how a judge’s race and gender might
explanation rests on the very different eligibility
influence his or her decision making,2 diversity on the
pools for men and women, given that few women
bench could have a substantive impact on court cases
previously occupied the kinds of professional posi-
as well. These concerns about representation have
tions that traditionally served as stepping stones for
prompted social scientists to study the effect of various
political careers (Conway, Steuernagel, and Ahern 1997).
methods of judicial selection on the diversification of
Other research on gender and political ambition,
the bench (e.g., Holmes and Emrey 2006; Hurwitz
however, suggests a different reason for the lack of
and Lanier 2003). However, if there are systematic
descriptive representation for women, a reason poten-
differences between men and women and between
tially less amenable to institutional remediation:
minorities and nonminorities in their career aspirations,
Women may be less ambitious for public office to
then our understanding of how methods of judicial
begin with and less inclined to seek higher office
selection enhance or diminish diversity on the bench
once they have entered public life. Considered col-
will be incomplete without an understanding of those
lectively, the major (though not uncontested) thrust of
differences in ambition.
this scholarship suggests that women may be less
In this study, we seek to make two contributions.
ambitious for higher office than men are (e.g., Carroll
First, we hope to enlarge the scope of scholarship on
1994; Costantini 1990; Fulton et al. 2006). A number
political ambition by examining the attitudes of a set
of factors might be at work. For example, Sapiro
of important state trial court judges. Second, we hope
(1982) emphasized the role that family life played in
to further scholarly understanding of the staffing of
an individual’s interest in public office, with women
the bench by exploring how race and gender manifest
(but not men) reducing “conflict by avoiding taking
themselves in the judicial ambitions of these trial
on public commitments” (p. 274). Other research
court jurists. To pursue these dual goals, we rely on
reveals that men and women assess their own qualifi-
original data from a survey administered to regularly
cations for office differently, with women more con-
sitting, appointed or elected, New York Supreme
cerned about their qualifications for office (Carroll
Court justices.3
1994) and less likely to see themselves as qualified
(Fox and Lawless 2004) when compared to men.
In a recent study, Williams (2008) focused on the
Ambition, Gender, and Race
political ambitions of attorneys in Texas and found
several effects related to gender. Slightly fewer female
Writing in 1972, Black lamented the paucity of
respondents than male respondents (21 percent and
accumulated knowledge about political ambition
27 percent, respectively) identified themselves as
while singling out Schlesinger’s work as “[t]he most
ambitious for a judgeship. However, women who had
significant exception to the general neglect of political
run for office previously were more likely to be ambi-
ambition” (p. 144). More than thirty years later, a host
tious than men who had done so, and women who
of scholars has greatly expanded our understanding of
perceived that women have a more difficult time
the nature and effects of political ambition. For
reaching the judiciary were much less likely to run
example, we know that static ambition—that is, “the
for office. Williams also noted that the size of some
aspiration to make a long-term career out of a partic-
effects varied considerably by gender.
ular office” (Schlesinger [1991] 1994, 40)—is associ-
There is much less scholarship devoted to under-
ated with higher salaries (Squire 1988), while age
standing the juxtaposition of race and political ambi-
generally dampens progressive ambition—that is, the
tion.4 This deficiency is at least in part due to the lack
desire to advance to higher positions (Loomis 1984).
of officials to study: Most of the extant literature has
We also know that prior experience in politics and
focused on ambition for elective office, and the
partisan ties structure the decision to run for office ini-
number of racial minorities holding elective office in
tially (Costantini 1990) as well as the decision to run
America has been historically quite low. In 1970,
for higher office (Rohde 1979). An especially fecund
there were only 1,469 black elected officials of any
line of research has examined differences between
kind nationwide, and in 2001, there were only 9,101
men and women vis-à-vis political ambition.
(Bositis 2003). Nonetheless, there is some scholarship
One conventional explanation for these observed
that investigates how race influences political ambi-
differences rests on the incumbency advantage, an
tion. For example, Fox and Lawless (2005)...