Recent Posts
- Protected: Final Exam Part 2. Student-Generated Questions for final exam.
- Protected: Final Exam, Part 2: Critical Race Theory Research
- Protected: Final Exam, Part 1. Harassment Prompt
- Protected: Extra Credit: Emma Morales, “A Feminist Lens: The Big Beautiful Bill’s Effect on SNAP Recipients
- Protected: Say Their Names: The Women Who Died After Being Denied Emergency Abortion Care
Recent Comments
- Jorling Saravia on Protected: Rape laws, rape culture, and intersectionality
- Jorling Saravia on Protected: Killing Us Softly
- Jad Abdelmajid on Protected: “Bloody Sunday” and “Selma”
- Rachelle Orozco on Protected: Social Media and Teenage Girls
- Rachelle Orozco on Protected: J. E. B. v. Alabama 1994
Archives
- April 2026
- March 2026
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- February 2025
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- November 2020
- June 2020
- March 2018
- July 2015
- June 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- June 2014
- February 2014
- November 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- April 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- July 2012
- April 2011
Well, when you have different judges. There will always be a difference of opinion. Throughout history, we have always seen white male judges, never any representation, even in films or television. So it’s understandably that if you have a black/latino/etc, judge or a woman judge, they would have a different point of view, than that of Standard view that you would usually get or see.
What Jericho’s project also highlights is how much the composition of the judiciary is a political choice. Presidents and senators decide who interprets the Constitution, and those choices ripple outward for decades. If the gatekeepers keep choosing the same kinds of judges, we shouldn’t be shocked when the system keeps producing the same kinds of outcomes.
I stand by my comment from last year, but to further reiterate/add: There is no denying that judicial representation matters. Judges, although bound by law, have great latitude in making judicial decisions. Whether a judge is a man, a woman, a Democrat, or a Republican, there will always be differences in opinion. This primarily arises from our individualized experiences and the systemic barriers each of us has probably encountered. For instance, intersectionality plays a role as we see more women of color in judicial positions.
358 ~ Repeat.
This analysis reinforces what many of us already assume about our political system. Positions of power, especially in the judiciary, are still held mostly by one group: White, male, Republican judges. The Gatekeepers data makes that imbalance clear. There were 452 White judges, while the numbers for other racial groups were extremely small, with only 17 Black judges and 19 Latino judges. The gender gap was just as striking. Women held only 30 judgeships, compared to 458 held by men. This pattern shows how deeply rooted these power structures are and raises real questions about whether a judiciary this uniform can genuinely reflect the society it serves. Since this survey, I wonder if anything has meaningfully changed.
358 – same.
I think this analysis reiterates the long-held beliefs about our political system. That is, governmental positions, individuals who have the power to influence law and policy, are solely dominated by one specific group—those who are men, White, and Republican. The Gatekeepers analysis shows that there is a vast majority of white judges, 452 to be exact, compared to other race groups, who play a bare minimum in the results (i.e., Blacks at 17 and Latinos at 19). Additionally, the gender category was (by far) the most striking—women made up 30 judgships, whereas men dominated the arena with 458. This says much about the conflicts between superiority and inferiority, where men have historically dominated high-level positions. Is this type of system effective? In essence, a judge has/can have great power, and if we keep on maintaining the same pattern of electing White, male, Republican judges, then is that really representative of society and the people? Who knows. The survey is relatively new, so I wonder if we have made any progress in diversifying these roles. I am familiar with a few women judges, but I think nothing has changed…
I am very thankful that my small project to Professor Lyles’s work on “The Gatekeepers” has been added to this blog, the book has opened my eyes considerably and there are not enough ways to say thanks for this opportunity.
In this reply, separated so that the thanksgiving can be separated from the file, there is the excel sheet file from the google sheet I used.
The calculators are formatted such that one can change the point values (some put Strongly Agree as 5 and Strongly Disagree as 1), as well as change the percentages and population sizes.
One of the most important lessons to me was this: in an ideal world where there were equal numbers of judges by race, gender, or party, their beliefs would equal out into a middle position.
But in reality, there were more Republican, White, and Male judges back in the 1990’s during the book’s creation. Needless to say, representation really matters for the judge population despite what law school may say.
Jericho Bernal – A Data Analysis on Prof. Lyles’s The Gatekeepers (1)