TY - JOUR
T1 - Representative Appointments
T2 - The Effect of Women's Groups in Contentious Supreme Court Confirmations
AU - Sommer, Udi
N1 - Funding Information: An earlier version of this article was presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April 2006, Chicago, IL. I would like to thank the editors and the four anonymous reviewers for their invaluable comments. I would also like to thank Victor Asal and Sally Friedman for their helpful advice on this manuscript. Jesse Ellman was an outstanding research coordinator for this project, and Jonathan Parent and Tanya Dissanayake were helpful as research assistants. Finally, without the support of Dean Jeffrey Straussman and the Rockefeller College Research Fund, completing this project would not have been possible.
PY - 2013/1
Y1 - 2013/1
N2 - A large share of decision makers in modern democratic systems are appointed. To what degree do those officials represent constituents? Representation in this case is determined in part by the extent to which constituents influence the appointment process. This article examines the influence of women's organized interests and constituency preferences on Supreme Court confirmation votes. With topics such as sexual harassment, privacy, and Roe v. Wade looming large, gender politics became a salient issue during confirmation battles in the late 1980s and early 1990s and has remained so since. Original data from the contentious appointments of Justices David Souter, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Sonia Sotomayor are analyzed. Results confirm that women's organized interests and popular preferences have an impact on contentious nominations. Implications for popular influences on appointments and for representation in government writ large are discussed.
AB - A large share of decision makers in modern democratic systems are appointed. To what degree do those officials represent constituents? Representation in this case is determined in part by the extent to which constituents influence the appointment process. This article examines the influence of women's organized interests and constituency preferences on Supreme Court confirmation votes. With topics such as sexual harassment, privacy, and Roe v. Wade looming large, gender politics became a salient issue during confirmation battles in the late 1980s and early 1990s and has remained so since. Original data from the contentious appointments of Justices David Souter, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Sonia Sotomayor are analyzed. Results confirm that women's organized interests and popular preferences have an impact on contentious nominations. Implications for popular influences on appointments and for representation in government writ large are discussed.
KW - Supreme Court appointments
KW - organized interests
KW - political appointments
KW - representation
KW - women groups
KW - women's representation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84872034656&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/1554477X.2013.747876
DO - 10.1080/1554477X.2013.747876
M3 - مقالة
SN - 1554-477X
VL - 34
SP - 1
EP - 22
JO - Journal of Women, Politics and Policy
JF - Journal of Women, Politics and Policy
IS - 1
ER -
