Shades of Justice: How Court Composition Influences Sentencing Disparities in U.S. Trial Courts

Shades of Justice: How Court Composition Influences Sentencing Disparities in U.S. Trial Courts, reconceptualizes how we understand the role of racial diversity among public officials. Turning to the judiciary, I uncover the surprising effect of racial diversity among criminal trial judges. This story is about much more than the extent to which judges represent civilians with whom they share a racial identity, or differences in the behavior of majority- and minority-racial-group-member judges. I argue, instead, that the effect of racial diversity among judges on sentencing includes three components: differences in dominant- and minority-racial-group-member judges’ behavior; changes in minority-racial-group-member judges’ behavior as they gain co-racial colleagues; and changes in dominant-racial-group member judges’ behavior as they gain colleagues who are members of a racial minority group. Focusing on Black and White judges’ sentencing of Black and White defendants, I find that as Black judges gain representation on the bench, racial disparities in sentencing decrease. I further show that the relationship between racial diversity and sentencing is largely driven by changes in White judges’ behavior as they gain Black colleagues, resulting from interactions that make race and inequality more salient to White judges’ behavior. These results suggest that increasing Black judges’ representation could lead to a significant reduction in the annual number of incarceration sentences, length of sentences, and incarceration spending. Shades of Justice contributes to our understanding of the sources of profound disparities in the U.S. criminal legal system, but also to current debates about diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, which typically feature opinions rather than observations.