Confirmation: An examination of gender and race in the questioning of Supreme Court nominees

• In Event: Sociology of Sex and Gender Section Roundtables
  In Refereed Roundtable (60 minute): Table 14. Law, Activism, and Institutional Politics

Abstract

Existing research tells us that women and nominees of color are more likely to be questioned about their capabilities, impartiality, and to be subjected to interruptions, negative tone, and differentiation language. To what extent do gendered and racialized dynamics emerge in the context of judicial confirmation hearings? I employ a content analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominees dating back to President Ronald Reagan’s nomination of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in 1981, the first woman to be appointed and confirmed to serve on the Court since 1789, when the first Supreme Court nominations were confirmed. Throughout the hearings, gender and race shaped the ways in which nominees were questioned. This came through in two major ways. First, the gender and race of women and nominees of color were brought up frequently, both indirectly and directly. Second, women and nominees of color were more likely to be asked about identity-based issues, like those related to gender and race, in ways that implied that they might bring bias to these issues due to their position as women and people of color—a concern never attributed to White men. Supreme Court judicial nominations have become of national significance, with confirmation hearings often watched closely in mainstream media. During confirmation hearings, the treatment of women and nominees of color can perpetuate harmful stereotypes, discrimination, and may convey a message to the public about the capabilities of the justices and the legitimacy of the Court.

Author

• Mariah Alaina Lindsay, University of Wisconsin-Madison