Women “doing” the judiciary: rethinking the justice argument for descriptive representation
Name:
PGI-2019-0035.R2_Proof_hi.pdf
Size:
209.7Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Sch Govt & Publ PolicyIssue Date
2020-07-21
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTDCitation
Suzanne Dovi & Francy Luna (2020): Women “doing” the judiciary: rethinking the justice argument for descriptive representation, Politics, Groups, and Identities, DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2020.1789882Journal
POLITICS GROUPS AND IDENTITIESRights
Copyright © 2020 Western Political Science Association.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
In this paper, we explore how political scientists can improve the study of gender diversity in the judiciary by drawing on the normative and theoretical literature on representation generally, and on descriptive representation specifically. In particular, we examine an undertheorized argument within the literature on descriptive representation, namely, the justice argument. Using Nancy Fraser's discussion of two justice frameworks, specifically, the recognition and redistribution frameworks, we argue that political scientists should evaluate the justice effects of a diverse judiciary usingmultipleconceptions of justice. In this way, we use normative theory to generate new research directions in the study of judicial diversity.Note
18 month embargo; published online: 21 July 2020ISSN
2156-5503Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1080/21565503.2020.1789882
