Abstract

This essay critically examines the proposition that a female-majority U.S. Supreme Court would enhance the administration of justice. Drawing upon empirical studies and psychological research, the author contends that gender parity—not dominance by either sex—best serves judicial effectiveness. The argument is structured around three central claims: first, that women exhibit higher levels of anxiety, which may impair decision-making under the intense pressure characteristic of Supreme Court responsibilities; second, that the inherently subjective nature of fairness may be compounded by emotional reasoning, which research suggests women more frequently employ; and third, that men tend to exhibit greater cooperative efficacy when working in homogenous groups, a trait crucial for collegial judicial deliberation. The paper concludes that, given the structural and functional demands of the Court, a balanced gender composition is most conducive to impartial and collaborative jurisprudence.

Keywords

Gender Representation; Judicial Decision-Making; Supreme Court; Anxiety and Stress; Cooperation in Groups; Subjectivity in Justice

INTRODUCTION

“When I’m sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court], and I say, 'When there are nine,' people are shocked. But there'd been nine men, and nobody's ever raised a question about that,” said Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a distinguished female Supreme Court justice. This notion highlights the historically negative views toward women regarding their ability to serve as justices in the Supreme Court. However, nowadays, the number of women and men on the court is almost equal, signifying significant progress on the gender representation issue. In this essay, I argue that justice would not be better served in the Supreme Court if female justices outnumbered males because a) women succumb to anxiety in decision-making, b) the concept of fairness is subjective, and c) men cooperate better as a group than women.

Recent articles have suggested that women have some advantages over men in terms of decision-making. According to an article in Forbes by Kathy Caprino, “There’s growing evidence that when women occupy multiple leadership roles, smarter decisions are made. In February, the Peterson Institute analyzed the profits of 21,980 firms worldwide and found that companies where women held 30% of the top leadership roles earned 15% more, on average, than companies with no women on their boards or in their C-suites.” Furthermore, the article

states that teams with a higher proportion of women often reached “better decisions” and generated more “novel solutions.” There are many problems with these claims, however. They overlook the fact that individuals vary greatly and leadership effectiveness cannot solely be determined by gender, as not every woman will make better decisions than every man.

ANXIETY

Making decisions under stress can lead to unfavorable results for both men and women. Still, it is necessary to understand how each gender responds to anxiety if we are to consider the gender breakdown of the Supreme Court. A study done by HSE showed that “women workers are one and [a] half times more likely than men to be stressed.” This higher stress rate for women also increases the number of women diagnosed with anxiety disorders. CNBC shows how grueling being a Supreme Court justice can be, saying, "Justices often evaluate thousands of cases a year, selecting dozens that will go before the court and making decisions that will impact millions of Americans.” There is no doubt that Supreme Court justices face enormous pressure daily. Since women are more likely to be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, according to an article titled “What is the anxiety gender gap” by Forbes, it stands to reason that there may be more women judges with anxiety disorders. Some critics might counter this claim by asserting that most judges have grown accustomed to the pressure, as former Supreme Court Justice Steven Breyer articulates the discipline and management of thoughtful processes behind every case, stating that “No one speaks twice until everyone has spoken once," he said. "If you try to make a point saying that 'my argument is better than yours'...that'll get you nowhere."

Still, there are a few means to ascertain what most justices contend with emotionally or psychologically. Supreme Court justices bear the burden of determining the constitutional outcome of each case in all its intricacies, which is a heavy load indeed. In previous years, a few select cases of a justice’s mental health struggles have been brought into the public spotlight. For example, in 1988, Supreme Court Justice Gerald Le Dain was forced to resign after revealing his mental health struggles. His forced resignation not only ultimately showcased how extreme the punishments could be if you were caught having mental struggles as a judge, but also highlighted the social stigma surrounding mental health issues.

Following that incident, Supreme Court Justice Clement Gascon opened up about his struggles with depression and anxiety disorders. In a public statement, he said, "For over 20 years, I have been dealing with a sometimes insidious illness: depression and anxiety disorders.” Even under

these circumstances, he was able to help break the stigma surrounding mental health while making the right judgments with his career. If male justices work with these illnesses, female Supreme Court justices may want to hide their private struggles even more due to the fear of adding to the previous negativity of female workers in these high-pressure environments. For example, one analysis of the 1990, 2002, and 2015 terms showed 65.9% of all interruptions on

the Supreme Court were directed at three female justices on the bench, showing how gender plays into a huge perception of how much space and time one gets in this profession. The fear of being doubted and insulted has unquestionably silenced the voices of female workers in all professional careers. 

SUBJECTIVITY

Fairness is subjective. Even if there were a method of measuring fairness, getting everyone to agree on the parameters would be almost impossible. People often look at a case, immediately decide who is right, and then stick to that opinion resolutely. This phenomenon is amplified in today’s society, where extremists resort to violence when they do not get their way. Supreme

Court justices have various backgrounds and ideologies, which means it would be even harder to get all of them to agree on parameters to determine what is fair and what is not.

Research between men and women in purchasing decisions revealed that men tended to look at decision-making in an objective manner, while women often rely on subjective considerations. This relates to Supreme Court decisions because people purchase what reflects their own beliefs, similar to court decisions. While subjectivity is important in making decisions, relying heavily on personal experiences for decisions that will impact millions of people may not produce the best outcome. Additionally, the research paper “Gender differences in the effects of emotion induction on intertemporal decision-making” also specified that in fearful situations, women were more likely to choose immediate rewards compared to men when in a state of happiness. It is concerning how subjective emotions are towards different subjects, which has a defining impact on both genders.

Previously, I presented data about how women leaders in business can positively impact firms' profitability. However, businesses and courts operate under different objectives. Businesses seek to maximise profits and may value leaders who bring subjective perspectives that align with consumer and market demands. Courts, by contrast, are expected to function independently of public opinion, interpreting the Constitution and applying it to specific cases. The differing dynamics with which men and women approach decision-making may affect court rulings. Given the training in objectivity required of legal professionals, it is difficult to determine whether that training can overpower natural inclinations.

COOPERATION

Part of serving as a Supreme Court justice involves working collaboratively before reaching a final decision. Each justice needs to convince others about their way of thinking to reach a particular decision. Before reaching a particular decision, each group member must be willing to listen and cooperate to ensure everyone has had the chance to speak their mind. An analysis by

the American Psychological Association revealed that men cooperate better with other men than women cooperate with each other. The case involved over 272 studies with 31,000 participants. Most of the studies were done in a laboratory, and the prisoner’s dilemma was most often used, which can give general insights into cooperation and self-gain when in a high-pressure, isolated situation.

Furthermore, the most frequently used framework in the study was the prisoner's dilemma, a method for assessing cooperation versus self-interest. Results revealed that women were more likely to cooperate than men when interacting with the opposite gender. This suggests that an evenly balanced Supreme Court may already improve the quality of deliberations by encouraging cooperation.

CONCLUSION

Justice is a complex and evolving concept, and debates on gender roles within the judiciary add to that complexity. When considering the Supreme Court, research suggests that women’s tendencies toward subjectivity and men’s greater group cooperation shape deliberation. However, studies on women in leadership often overlook the unique responsibilities of justices, whose decisions rise above public opinion. These factors suggest that the current Supreme Court works optimally when the gender split is balanced. 

Author's Note:

The fact that the Supreme Court is not swayed by public opinion is due in large part to its structure. Since justices are appointed instead of being elected by the public and because they serve until they retire or die, they are indifferent to outside pressures such as public opinion.

Oliver Li is a high schooler at Seattle Academy who is interested in Psychology. He loves to write research papers on law and other areas of society, and how people change over time or under pressure.

Bibliography

Broster, Alice. “What Is the Anxiety Gender Gap?” Forbes, 9 Nov. 2020, www.forbes.com/sites/alicebroster/2020/11/09/what-is-the-anxiety-gender-gap/?sh=6f67a 29b7659, accessed 5 June 2023.

Caprino, Kathy. “How Decision-Making Is Different Between Men And Women and Why It Matters In Business.” Forbes, 12 May 2016,

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2016/05/12/how-decision-making-is-different

-between-men-and-women-and-why-it-matters-in-business/?sh=2018830a4dcd, accessed 20 March 2023.

Clark, Brian, and Kate Sprague. “Here's what it's like to be a Supreme Court justice.” CNBC, 20 July 2018,

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/18/supreme-court-scotus-politics-donald-trump-brett-kav anaugh.html, accessed 25 March 2023.

Debusmann Jr, Bernd. “How the Supreme Court Came to Dominate the US Political Debate.” Www.bbc.com, 2 July 2024, www.bbc.com/news/articles/crg4rz6zedyo.

Fiorenzato, Eleonora, et al. “Gender Differences in the Effects of Emotion Induction on Intertemporal Decision-Making: PLoS ONE.” PLoS ONE, vol. 19, no. 3, 20 Mar. 2024, pp. 1–22,

web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=6&sid=308efb5e-085f-4bc7-9eab-11d1ebc8 c157@redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ==#anchor=bib1&AN=1761 52842&db=asn, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0299591.

“In 1988, Another Supreme Court Justice Opened up about Depression - and He Got Pushed out .” CBC , 16 May 2019,

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-wednesday-edition-1.5136689/in-198 8-another-supreme-court-justice-opened-up-about-depression-and-he-got-pushed-out-1.5 137582, accessed 27 March 2023.

Jacobi, Tonja, and Dylan Schweers. “Female Supreme Court Justices Are Interrupted More by Male Justices and Advocates.” Harvard Business Review, 11 Apr. 2017,

hbr.org/2017/04/female-supreme-court-justices-are-interrupted-more-by-male-justices-an d-advocates.

“Justices.” SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ,

https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/justices.aspx, accessed 28 March 2023.

“ Men and Women Cooperate Equally for the Common Good .” American Psychological Association, Apa.org, 2023,

www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2011/09/cooperate-equally, accessed 23 Sept. 2025.

Pynchon, Victoria. “Men Cooperate More with Each Other than Women Do.” Forbes, 26 Sept. 2011,

https://www.forbes.com/sites/shenegotiates/2011/09/26/men-cooperate-more-with-each-o ther-than-women-do/?sh=2f1f1344a486, accessed 25 March 2023.

Vogue, Ariane de. “Justices Worry about the Future of the Supreme Court - and Point Fingers as to Who's to Blame.” CNN, 29 July 2022,

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/29/politics/supreme-court-kagan-sotomayor-barrett-roberts-t homas/index.html, accessed 27 March 2023.

“Why are stress levels among women 50% higher than men?” Priory.

https://www.priorygroup.com/blog/why-are-stress-levels-among-women-50-higher-than men, accessed 23 March 2023.

Smith, James F. “U.S. Supreme Court v. American Public Opinion: The Verdict Is In.” Harvard, 13 July 2020,

www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/democracy-governance/us-supreme court-v-american-public-opinion, accessed 1 June 2023.