Gentlewomen of the Jury

Vivian Rotenstein, V. Hans
{"title":"Gentlewomen of the Jury","authors":"Vivian Rotenstein, V. Hans","doi":"10.36641/mjgl.29.2.gentlewomen","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article undertakes a contemporary assessment of the role of women on the jury. In 1946, at a time when few women served on U.S. juries, the all-male Supreme Court opined in Ballard v. United States: “The truth is that the two sexes are not fungible; a community made up exclusively of one is different from a community composed of both; the subtle interplay of influence of one on the other is among the imponderables.” Three-quarters of a century later, women’s legal and social status has changed dramatically, with increased participation in the labor force, expanded leadership roles, and the removal of legal and other barriers to their civic engagement, including jury service. Theoretical developments and research have produced new insights about how genderconforming individuals enact their gender roles. We combine these insights with a substantial body of jury research that has examined the effects of jurors’ gender on their decision-making processes and verdict preferences in criminal and civil cases. We also consider how nonbinary and gender-nonconforming individuals might bring distinctive perspectives and experiences to the jury. After a review of the historical record, describing shifts over time in women’s jury participation in the face of legal and societal barriers, we summarize evidence from decision-making research, gender scholarship, and jury studies to examine whether women bring a different voice to jury service. Our review, which demonstrates substantial commonalities as well as significant areas of divergence in jurors’ attitudes and verdicts as a function of their gender, altogether underscores the importance of full and equitable participation on the jury.","PeriodicalId":303089,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.29.2.gentlewomen","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Article undertakes a contemporary assessment of the role of women on the jury. In 1946, at a time when few women served on U.S. juries, the all-male Supreme Court opined in Ballard v. United States: “The truth is that the two sexes are not fungible; a community made up exclusively of one is different from a community composed of both; the subtle interplay of influence of one on the other is among the imponderables.” Three-quarters of a century later, women’s legal and social status has changed dramatically, with increased participation in the labor force, expanded leadership roles, and the removal of legal and other barriers to their civic engagement, including jury service. Theoretical developments and research have produced new insights about how genderconforming individuals enact their gender roles. We combine these insights with a substantial body of jury research that has examined the effects of jurors’ gender on their decision-making processes and verdict preferences in criminal and civil cases. We also consider how nonbinary and gender-nonconforming individuals might bring distinctive perspectives and experiences to the jury. After a review of the historical record, describing shifts over time in women’s jury participation in the face of legal and societal barriers, we summarize evidence from decision-making research, gender scholarship, and jury studies to examine whether women bring a different voice to jury service. Our review, which demonstrates substantial commonalities as well as significant areas of divergence in jurors’ attitudes and verdicts as a function of their gender, altogether underscores the importance of full and equitable participation on the jury.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
陪审团的女士们
本文对女性在陪审团中的作用进行了当代评估。1946年,在美国很少有女性担任陪审团成员的时候,由男性组成的最高法院在巴拉德诉美国案(Ballard v. United States)中表示:“事实是,两性是不可替代的;一个只由一个人组成的社区不同于一个由两者组成的社区;两者之间微妙的相互影响是不可估量的。”四分之三个世纪后,妇女的法律和社会地位发生了巨大变化,劳动力参与率提高,领导作用扩大,妨碍妇女参与公民活动的法律和其他障碍消除,包括陪审团服务。理论发展和研究已经产生了关于性别一致性个体如何制定其性别角色的新见解。我们将这些见解与陪审团的大量研究相结合,这些研究考察了陪审员的性别对他们在刑事和民事案件中的决策过程和判决偏好的影响。我们还考虑了非二元和性别不一致的个人如何为陪审团带来独特的观点和经验。在回顾历史记录,描述女性在面对法律和社会障碍时参与陪审团的变化之后,我们总结了决策研究、性别学术研究和陪审团研究的证据,以检验女性是否为陪审团服务带来了不同的声音。我们的审查表明,陪审员的态度和裁决因其性别而有很大的共性,也有很大的分歧,这都强调了陪审团充分和公平参与的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Gentlewomen of the Jury Title IX and "Menstruation or Related Conditions" Trek to Triumph Making Mandates Last: Increasing Female Representation on Corporate Boards in the U.S. Advancing Reproductive Justice in Latin America Through a Transitional Justice Lens
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1