She Runs for Justice: Women Judges, Campaigns, and the Fight for Fairness[1]
What does it take to run for judicial office as a woman?
Ana Maria Crespo Polo[2]
Overview: This article captures a powerful and timely conversation from our recent webinar, held as part of IAWJ's Women in Leadership in Law Program. The event opened by outlining both the research and field experience of Fundación Construir, a Bolivian-based organization, on how gender shapes judicial elections. The discussion then turned to the lived experiences of women judges from the United States and Bolivia who have boldly stepped into the electoral arena. Dr. Elizabeth Lane also presented compelling research highlighting how gender stereotypes and structural barriers impact women candidates in judicial elections globally. From overcoming gender bias and public scrutiny to safeguarding integrity and personal security, these trailblazing women: Justice Ann Walsh Bradley[3] and Judge Nuria Gonzales[4] shared their lessons, challenges and moments that defined their journey. The learning gathered was strengthen by Professor Elizabeth Lane’s[5] expertise in regard to gender and judicial elections in the United States context.
How do judges come to serve in the bench?
This opening question initiated the dialogue by highlighting the diverse ways judicial elections are structured across different countries. As Justice Bradley stated, “our culture and methods of election may not resemble others”. In the United States (US), judicial election procedures are governed by a combination of state statutes and U.S. Supreme Court decisions that provide legal guidance and oversight. By way of contrast, Magistrate Gonzales explained that judicial elections in Bolivia are governed by the Political Constitution of the State, this particularity brings multiple implications. First, as opposed to in the US, rules governing elections are less likely to be varied as they would require constitutional amendment. This is important in the context of judicial elections because rules such as gender parity may affect the possibility of women running for judicial office and their chances of success. Secondly, in the US, as opposed to in Bolivia, there might be the possibility of candidates to run with a political association, this can have a great impact on their campaign strategy, and ultimately on their perception by voters. Although Magistrate Gonzales stated that even though political affiliation is not permitted under the Bolivian Constitution, in the last couple of judicial elections, there has been a number of media diffusions related to presumptive associations between candidates and political parties. She explained that this may have influenced how voters perceive the candidates, disproportionately impacting women due to the deeply ingrained misogynistic attitudes in Bolivian society.
Legal Ambition to Run for Judicial Office
As Dr Lane explained, legal ambition is a concept that can be compared to political ambition, which essentially consists of a drive to run for public office. The main difference outlined by Dr Lane resides on the fact that lawyers running for judgeships are already practising in their field (as this is often a pre-requisite for candidacy); in contrast, politicians often come from diverse professional backgrounds and typically begin their policymaking roles with little to no prior experience in the field. This could be seen as an advantage by women lawyers that are seeking to run for judicial office, as they would already have expertise in the legal field. Moreover, this expertise might be perceived positively by voters that feel that candidates are already qualified for their positions. Nonetheless, there are other factors that may deter women from running for this judicial office. These include, inter alia,an underestimation of women’s own capabilities to run for these positions, and the lack of networks in both, social and political dimensions. Expanding on the latter point, Justice Bradley stated that it is essential to create a network of support when running for office. As she explained, this can be a combination of familial and social support as well as encouragement from fellow women judges on an individual level and through an organisation such as National Association of Women Judges (NAWJ) or the IAWJ. As Justice Bradley noted, in the absence of political connections, an effective path to success lies in programs that equip women lawyers with the skills to run for office; these often include guidance from experts on media analysis and campaign managers as well as fellow judges, with the aim of running an effective judicial campaign. However, this strategy cannot apply in all legal contexts. As previously noted, this approach could not be implemented in Bolivia, where candidates are prohibited from actively campaigning. Instead, the National Electoral Committee is responsible for disseminating candidates’ information. Magistrate Gonzales emphasized that one way to promote women’s participation is through public education—particularly informing voters about the contributions women can make if elected. This is especially critical in remote Indigenous communities, where deeply rooted misogynistic beliefs about women’s roles in society persist.
Motivation behind running for Judgeship Position
Justice Bradley stated that her true motivation behind running for justice was to be able to help people and to make their lives better through her decisions as a Supreme Court judge. Magistrate Gonzales stated that her motivation to run for office was to promote judicial inclusion of women, and to demonstrate through judicial decisions how bias manifests in the administration of justice. Through their interventions both speakers sought to encourage women lawyers to actively engage in this arena in order to increase the number of women holding positions of leadership. Regarding bias, Judge Gonzales shared the unfortunate state of cultural bias in Bolivia that manifests in the voting polls. She noted that men are still often perceived as a 'better fit' for positions of power, including judicial roles. This perception is partly rooted in the belief that men possess stronger qualifications, due to greater access to educational and professional opportunities reflected in their resumes. She explained that this is often because women judges shoulder a tripartite role and have fewer opportunities to advance their education and professional qualifications—serving simultaneously as judges, as mothers, and often as the ‘jefe de familia’[6]. As a result, voters perceived them as less qualified, and less available even though the candidates have ample expertise and capacity. She hopes that with enough education and change of perceptions regarding women’s capacity, the public will acknowledge the conscious and unconscious bias that manifests in their voting.
In analysing the current system for electing judges in the United States, Dr Lane stated that studies demonstrate that women are more likely to be elected as judges if they are elected through elective systems rather than through appointment for the following reasons. First, because governors that have appointed a women judge may often feel like they have done their duty to increase representation on the bench, and so more women are less likely to be appointed at a later stage. Secondly, if governors are required to appoint judges to replace retiring judges, statistics demonstrate that they will opt to replace them with judges of the same sex, which statistically speaking, are mostly men. Thus, if women run for justice, at least in the US context, a higher percentage of candidates could actually run for judgeships and may be successful in doing so. Research also suggests that women tend to identify more closely with other women, making them more likely to support and contribute to their campaigns. This, however, reinforces the previous point stated by Justice Bradley, in that, women lawyers need to inform themselves as to how to effectively run a campaign. In any case, her Justice Bradley pointed out that ‘whether judges are elected or appointed, what we need is a system of judges that enhances public trust and confidence in the judiciary’.
Recommendations for women wishing to run for justice
How to maintain legal ethics in such a competitive arena?
Justice Bradley and Dr. Lane emphasized the importance of women joining committees and organizations dedicated to empowering female candidates for judgeships, noting that these bodies can offer essential tools, training, and networks to support their campaigns. Magistrate Gonzales re-emphasized that ‘we as women should opt to encourage one another in order to promote women holding roles in the Judiciary’. She stated that this is not an easy task and demands a lot of bravery from women lawyers. It requires them to step up and find new ways to communicate with their community what women can and will do for the administration of justice. Finally, Justice Bradley stated that one of the main characteristics that one should maintain is courage, that is, courage to stand up for one’s values and to remain true to oneself, this is important because ‘fidelity to yourself is what will hold you in the midst of all the temptation’.
This article has briefly outlined the valuable contributions by our speakers on our ‘She Runs for Justice Webinar’. Women from multiple jurisdictions have faced significant challenges when running for judicial office, mainly due enduring gender stereotypes, gender bias, and lack of access to resources for running campaigns. While each woman’s experience is shaped by the context in which she was elected, women judges and expert scholars alike consistently encourage women lawyers to pursue judicial office and actively offer their support to those currently running or considering a candidacy.
[1] Event organised by the International Association of Women Judges in partnership with Fundación Construir.
IAWJ extends their deepest gratitude to our expert speakers and to Fundación Construir for their support. This organisation sourced in Bolivia, focuses on promoting fairer and equative conditions for women, and on eradicating violence against women in all ambits of life.
[2] Ana Maria is a third year Law student at Macquarie University in Sydney. Ana began her studies in her home country of Ecuador. While studying, Ana worked in multiple areas of Ecuadorian law including civil, constitutional and criminal law. Her most impactful experience was working with victims of domestic and gender violence in her hometown’s Court of Justice. This working experience enhanced her practical legal skills and sparked a lifelong dream to use her career to help and protect the most vulnerable in society, especially women and children. In 2022 Ana moved to Sydney to continue her studies, and, in 2024, she began working at a local law firm that specialises in helping victims of historical sexual abuse. Ana aspires to contribute towards the fight against gender discrimination and the biased application of the law.
[3] Chief Justice Ann Walsh Bradley began her professional life as a high school teacher before earning her law degree from the University of Wisconsin Law School. She served for ten years as a circuit court judge in Marathon County before being elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 1995, becoming the first woman to achieve this position through election rather than appointment. She was re-elected in 2005 and 2015. In addition to her work on the supreme court, international judicial education and civics engagement have been priorities of Chief Justice Bradley. She serves as Chair of the Board of Managerial Trustees of the International Association of Women Judges. She previously served as the Vice Chair of the Board of Directors of the International Judicial Academy and as an international lecturer for the Academy, the American Bar Association’s Asia Law Initiative, the U.S. Department of State, and the IAWJ. Chief Justice Bradley has also played a vital role in promoting civics education throughout Wisconsin, advocating for greater understanding of the judiciary’s role in democracy.
[4] Judge Nuria Gonzales is a Magistrate of the Supreme Court of Justice of Bolivia. Her Honour has extensive experience, holding the following positions: Prosecutorial Roles: Departmental Prosecutor in Beni and Cochabamba and National Director of the Prosecutor's Office specialising in crimes against life and humanity. Judicial Roles: Judge of the Criminal Investigation Division, Judge of the Criminal Sentencing Tribunal, Judge of the Criminal Court, Appeal Division. President of the Court of Justice of Cochabamba.
[5] Dr Elizabeth Lane is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science located in the School of Public and International Affairs at North Carolina State University. Her work focuses on how external actors and the identity of these actors’ shape both the Supreme Court's decision making and public evaluations of the Court. Her work has been funded by the National Science Foundation and the American Political Science Association and has appeared in the Journal of Politics, Political Behavior, American Politics Research, and the Journal of Law and Courts.
[6] A word used in Latin America that refers to a woman being in charge of the maintenance of the household.