| Summary: | This dissertation identifies the political consequences of who sits on the bench and how they get there. The methods by which judges are selected affect the characteristics of the resulting pool of judges as well those judges' behavior once they take the bench. Furthermore, judicial selection methods and characteristics can be just as important in determining case outcomes as the content of judges' decisions. I provide empirical evidence for these broad arguments in three distinct papers, each of which addresses an under-explored aspect of the connections between judicial selection methods, judicial characteristics, and democratic ideals of accountability and representation. These three papers ask unique research questions that speak to the broad themes motivating this dissertation. To best answer these questions, each paper employs a different set of methodological approaches to analyze novel data on case outcomes, judicial selection methods, and judicial characteristics. The papers comprising this dissertation address variations in judicial selection methods and judicial decision-making across federal, state supreme, and state trial courts in the United States. Concerns about whether and to what extent there should be judicial accountability and representation exist across different types of courts, but the manifestations of the relationships between judicial selection methods and judicial characteristics with these factors vary.
|
|---|
