Faculty Bookshelf - Political Science & Legal Studies
| Title & Authors | Description |
|---|---|
Supreme Bias: Gender and Race in U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings Paul M. Collins, Jr., Christina L. Boyd, and Lori A. Ringhand (Stanford University Press, 2023) | In Supreme Bias, the authors present for the first time a comprehensive analysis of the dynamics of race and gender at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings held before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Drawing on their deep knowledge of the confirmation hearings, as well as rich new qualitative and quantitative evidence, the authors highlight how the women and people of color who have sat before the Committee have faced a significantly different confirmation process than their white male colleagues. Despite being among the most qualified and well-credentialed lawyers of their respective generations, female nominees and nominees of color face more skepticism of their professional competence, are subjected to stereotype-based questioning, are more frequently interrupted, and are described in less-positive terms by senators. In addition to revealing the disturbing extent to which race and gender bias exist even at the highest echelon of U.S. legal power, this book also provides concrete suggestions for how that bias can be reduced in the future. |
Crossing: How We Label and React to People on the Move Rebecca Hamlin (Stanford University Press, 2021) | Today, the concept of "the refugee" as distinct from other migrants looms large. Immigration laws have developed to reinforce a dichotomy between those viewed as voluntary, often economically motivated, migrants who can be legitimately excluded by potential host states, and those viewed as forced, often politically motivated, refugees who should be let in. In Crossing, Rebecca Hamlin argues against advocacy positions that cling to this distinction. Everything we know about people who decide to move suggests that border crossing is far more complicated than any binary, or even a continuum, can encompass. Drawing on cases of various "border crises" across Europe, North America, South America, and the Middle East, Hamlin outlines major inconsistencies and faulty assumptions on which the binary relies. |
Hometown Inequality: Race, Class, and Representation in American Local Politics Jesse Rhodes, Raymond La Raja, and Brian Schaffner (Cambridge University Press, 2020) | Local governments play a central role in American democracy, providing essential services such as policing, water, and sanitation. Moreover, Americans express great confidence in their municipal governments. But is this confidence warranted? Using big data and a representative sample of American communities, this book provides the first systematic examination of racial and class inequalities in local politics. We find that non-whites and less-affluent residents are consistent losers in local democracy. Residents of color and those with lower incomes receive less representation from local elected officials than do whites and the affluent. Additionally, they are much less likely than privileged community members to have their preferences reflected in local government policy. |
Lighting the Way: Federal Courts, Civil Rights, and Public Policy Douglas Rice (University of Virginia Press, 2020) | Introducing compelling new data on the policy focuses of federal courts, Rice presents the first long-term, comprehensive consideration of the judicial agenda. In doing so, he details the essential role of the Supreme Court and other federal courts in directing attention to issues in American politics through influential relationships with Congress, the presidency, and the public. The dynamics Rice illustrates grow from the strengths of political constituencies in various policy areas and the constitutional powers accorded to the courts. Lighting the Way provides strong evidence that, as long argued but never empirically demonstrated, the courts systematically lead the attention of other institutions on civil rights. |
The President and the Supreme Court: Going Public on Judicial Decisions from Washington to Trump Paul M. Collins, Jr. and Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha (Cambridge University Press, 2019) | When presidents take positions on pending Supreme Court cases or criticize the Court's decisions, they are susceptible to being attacked for acting as bullies and violating the norm of judicial independence. Why then do presidents target Supreme Court decisions in their public appeals? In this book, Paul M. Collins, Jr and Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha argue that presidents discuss the Court's decisions to demonstrate their responsiveness to important matters of public policy and to steer the implementation of the Court's decisions. Using data from Washington to Trump, they show that, far from being bullies, presidents discuss cases to promote their re-election, policy goals, and historical legacies, while attempting to affect the impact of Court decisions on the bureaucracy, Congress, the media, and the public. |
Have a new addition to this list? Email mworoner [at] umass [dot] edu (Morgan Woroner) with the details!