“We are a part of the problem they protest”: judges, representation and racial justice statements

In the wake of George Floyd's murder in May 2020, some state supreme courts decided to issue public comments to address disparities in racial justice, while others did not. We explain the decision to issue these voluntary statements as a strategic choice by state supreme court justices motivated by their retention audience and state demography. We demonstrate that state supreme courts appear responsive to their state audience when deciding to issue statements, specifically based on the number of racial justice protests by state residents and the liberalism of their state. Furthermore, state judicial retention systems and race identity in the public and on the state supreme court appear to influence word choice and sentiment in the racial justice statements issued. This extends understanding of motivations behind judges' decisions and behavior in extra-judicial settings beyond the courtroom.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Politics Groups and Identities
Published
2024-08-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2024.2386178
Primary Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

“We are a part of the problem they protest”: judges, representation and racial justice statements

Michael Catalano, Michael Romano, Todd A. Curry, Matthew Walz
Politics Groups and Identities
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
article

“We are a part of the problem they protest”: judges, representation and racial justice statements

Michael Catalano, Michael Romano, Todd A. Curry, Matthew Walz
article en

Abstract

In the wake of George Floyd's murder in May 2020, some state supreme courts decided to issue public comments to address disparities in racial justice, while others did not. We explain the decision to issue these voluntary statements as a strategic choice by state supreme court justices motivated by their retention audience and state demography. We demonstrate that state supreme courts appear responsive to their state audience when deciding to issue statements, specifically based on the number of racial justice protests by state residents and the liberalism of their state. Furthermore, state judicial retention systems and race identity in the public and on the state supreme court appear to influence word choice and sentiment in the racial justice statements issued. This extends understanding of motivations behind judges' decisions and behavior in extra-judicial settings beyond the courtroom.

Politics Groups and Identities
Binghamton University (US), University of Scranton (US), The University of Texas at El Paso (US), Shenandoah University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

“We are a part of the problem they protest”: judges, representation and racial justice statements — Michael Catalano, Michael Romano, et al. · Politics Groups and Identities (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS