As of 2024, **** percent of court judges in England and Wales were white, with **** percent from Black, Asian, mixed, or other ethnic backgrounds.

Number and proportion of Canadian judges, by selected industries, demographic characteristics and sex, Canada, provinces and territories.

Replication Data for: Can Racial Diversity Among Judges Affect Sentencing Outcomes? These files include data, code files, and additional information for analyses included in the manuscript and appendix.

This archive contains data and statistical code to replicate the analyses performed in the paper. The zip file contains a description of the data and code.

Published by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) - Half-yearly publication presenting the progress of candidates through the selection process for judicial office broken down by gender, ethnicity, disability and professional background.

Source agency: Justice

Designation: Official Statistics not designated as National Statistics

Language: English

Alternative title: JAC Completed selection exercises

The purpose of this study was to determine whether workgroup racial composition is related to sentence outcomes generally, and racial differences in sentencing in particular, across federal districts. This collection contains information on federal court district characteristics. Data include information about the social context, court context, and diversity of the courtroom workgroup for 90 federal judicial districts provided by 50 judicial district context variables.

For at least three decades now, those charged with nominating and confirming justices to the U.S. Supreme Court seem to be following a norm of prior judicial experience—one that makes previous service on the (federal) bench a near prerequisite for office. Largely as a result of this norm, today’s Court, while growing more and more diverse on some dimensions, is becoming less and less so on the dimension of career diversity. We argue that all norms that cut against diversity are problematic because they reduce the ability of the affected group (the Supreme Court not excepted) to perform its tasks but that the norm of prior judicial experience is particularly troublesome for two reasons. First, since virtually all California Law Review show occupational path to be an important factor in explaining judicial choices—from the votes justices cast to their respect for stare decisis—the homogeneity induced by the norm suggests that the current Court is not making optimal choices. Second, since women and people of color are less likely than white men to hold positions that are now, under the norm of prior judicial experience, steppingstones to the bench, the norm is working to limit diversity on dimensions other than occupational path. To explore our argument, we draw on diverse sources—ranging from an original database that houses a wealth of information of the occupational backgrounds of the justices to the writings of leading contemporary thinkers. From this exploration, we extract a singular but certainly non-trivial policy implication: Because of problems associated with a perpetuation of the norm of prior judicial experience, we believe that the Senate, the President and other key players in the confirmat ion process would be well advised to give greater attention to the career experiences of those they would like to see serve on the Nation’s highest Court. But such attention ought not come in the form of reserving the next two, three, or four vacancies for nominees hailing directly from private practice, legislatures, the cabinet, and so on. Rather it should come about by taking into account the career experiences of justices remaining on the Court and, then, working to avoid excessive duplicati on.

Parity in gender representation on the bench is crucial if the judiciary is to reflect the population it serves. This paper determines whether judicial appointments commissions, recently adopted in the UK, have made UK courts more diverse and whether they could increase judicial diversity in other commonwealth countries. I argue that while the appointment of women judges increased in the first year after appointment commissions were established in the UK, any increase in the gender equity of appointments vanished soon thereafter. Had UK-style commissions been implemented in Australia or New Zealand, the number of appointed women might have increased in the first year after the commissions were established, but that increase would not have been sustained in the long-term.

Biographical data for all judges and registrars of Israel for the period 1948-2023. Data include social and personal background, professional experience before judicial nomination, and career path in the judiciary.

Diversity statistics for selection exercises showing

This dataset contains all scripts and raw data to generate intermediate data sets (also provided), results, graphs, and tables in Spamann & Kloehn, Can Law Students Replace Judges in Experiments of Judicial Decision-Making? The only thing missing is raw demographic data (age, gender, prior experience) from judges that can only be disclosed under an NDA per FJC request (summary demographic data is, however, provided).

Number and proportion of Canadian judges, by selected industries, demographic characteristics and sex, Canada, provinces and territories.

Investigator(s): Bureau of Justice Statistics This series tabulates the number of persons convicted of felonies in state courts and describes their sentences. Data were collected from state courts and state prosecutors in 300 counties of the United States. The collection contains socio-demographic information such as age, race, and sex of the felon. Types of offenses committed include homicide, rape, and robbery. Adjudication variables referring to the process between arrest and sentencing are also included. Data can be analyzed at the national level or by the individual counties.Years Produced: Every 2 years

How does a judge's identity affect perceptions of their ability to preside fairly? We theorize that identity categories operate as ideological cues, and that the public views judges perceived as ideologically proximate as fairer, more impartial, and more inspiring of trust in courts broadly. Using a conjoint survey experiment with a diverse national sample, we find support for this theory and show that race, gender, and especially sexuality are used as ideological cues. The effect of identities is conditioned by respondent partisanship. Democratic respondents trust judges with marginalized identities more than judges with dominant identities. Republicans are relatively indifferent to judges' race or gender, but are significantly less trusting of gay judges. We also uncover limited effects when a judge presides over a case in which their identity is salient. These results suggest that the public doesn't seek descriptive representation as such, but uses identity categories to achieve ideological congruence.

We collected publicly available biographical and demographic information on all judges for each of the Standing International Forum of Commercial Courts (SIFOCC) members that employed traveling judges on June 1, 2021. We identified 131 current and former traveling judges on the relevant courts, of which 72 were listed as active judges on June 1, 2021. Historical information was not available for all courts. As a result, we focused on a snapshot of the courts on June 1, 2021. Anyone using the data needs to be aware that judicial appointments change frequently and that, as of this writing, it no longer represents the current composition of the courts.

While authorship assignment has been studied extensively in the U.S. Supreme Court, relatively little is known about such decisions in the intermediate federal courts. Moreover, what we know about circuit courts relates only to published opinions (those which constitute precedent under the doctrine of stare decisis and, thus, influence policy). Little is known about authorship of less influential unpublished opinions. Distinguishing between the costs, benefits, and risks inherent in authoring published versus unpublished opinions, we develop and test theoretical expectations about how demographic characteristics of opinion assignors and assignees influence authorship across opinion type. We conduct empirical tests using an exhaustive original dataset containing all authored dispositive circuit panel opinions issued in 2012. The results reveal that white and male judges are more likely to assign white and male judges to write published opinions and less likely to assign them to write unpublished opinions. The substantive sizes of the discrepancies are somewhat modest, but our results indicate that judges from historically disadvantaged groups have fewer opportunities to shape policy and they shoulder a disproportionately larger share of the routine chore of resolving individual cases.