A Short History of Judicial Diversity

Abstract Judicial diversity is a priority without priority. While few would argue, openly at least, against a more diverse judiciary in principle, there is still some way to go to make it a reality. And yet, despite the slow rate of progress, reigniting conversations about diversity may seem unwise in the current political moment, raising the question of whether those seeking to achieve a truly diverse judiciary have anywhere (new) to go. We seem to have reached an impasse. This article brings the insights of feminist legal history to bear on arguments for judicial diversity. Drawing on original archival research, it focuses on the establishment of the Industrial Court in 1919 and tells, for the first time, how there came to be statutory requirement for women’s presence on the court. It argues that the quality argument for diversity—that a court is stronger and its decision-making better for the inclusion of women among its members—was central to this success. It goes on to argue that in unsettling deep-seat assumptions particularly around arguments for the imposition of quotas, the history of the Industrial Court, and feminist legal history more generally, offers a way out of the impasse and a reason to keep talking about judicial diversity. This is important. For it is only by doing so that we have any chance of securing a judiciary that is truly diverse.