Berkeley Program in Law and Economics

This paper investigates indirect influences of gender diversification on the U.S. Court of Appeals, focusing upon whether and how women influence policy through pathways other than their individual votes. We analyze workplace sexual harassment cases spanning 1977 to 2006. Building upon recent work showing that women influence the votes of male colleagues when serving with them on three-judge panels, we probe the mechanism driving this pattern, and we find that deliberative processes rather than bargaining dynamics explain gender panel effects. We also find that the extent of doctrine which women have participated in crafting is positively associated with subsequent decisions for the plaintiff, and that the proportion of women on the full circuit, which exercises a monitoring role over individual panels, is associated with panel decisions for the plaintiff. We thus add to work showing that the influence of women on the U.S. Court of Appeals extends well beyond their individual votes.