I'm unaware of any data suggesting that the 40% figure for women practicing at large law firms fails to account for those pressures. Indeed, focusing only on large law firms, the numbers before the Supreme Court are actually worse. A significant majority of the women who appear before the Court these days are government lawyers. I don't …
I'm unaware of any data suggesting that the 40% figure for women practicing at large law firms fails to account for those pressures. Indeed, focusing only on large law firms, the numbers before the Supreme Court are actually worse. A significant majority of the women who appear before the Court these days are government lawyers. I don't know what the "right" number is, but my anecdotal sense is that there's still a large disconnect between the number of women in private practice at the kinds of firms that regularly appear before the Court and the number of arguments delivered by women.
It may be that there is no data so for now we are stuck with anecdotes, but I am always reminded that the plural of anecdote is not "data". My experience from decades in the corporate world is that women and men tend to make different career choices and that those choices have consequences. I don't know that this is the case in law, but having observed it in other industries, my anecdotal sense is that this factor likely accounts for a significant part of the divergence regarding arguments before the Supreme Court. But, I cannot prove it.
Don’t fall victim to a scientism fallacy. The plural of anecdote *is* data, in some observational sciences like ethnography. It’s how you tease out patterns. Not everything is physics, not everything can be demonstrated through a double-blind controlled trial.
I'm unaware of any data suggesting that the 40% figure for women practicing at large law firms fails to account for those pressures. Indeed, focusing only on large law firms, the numbers before the Supreme Court are actually worse. A significant majority of the women who appear before the Court these days are government lawyers. I don't know what the "right" number is, but my anecdotal sense is that there's still a large disconnect between the number of women in private practice at the kinds of firms that regularly appear before the Court and the number of arguments delivered by women.
It may be that there is no data so for now we are stuck with anecdotes, but I am always reminded that the plural of anecdote is not "data". My experience from decades in the corporate world is that women and men tend to make different career choices and that those choices have consequences. I don't know that this is the case in law, but having observed it in other industries, my anecdotal sense is that this factor likely accounts for a significant part of the divergence regarding arguments before the Supreme Court. But, I cannot prove it.
Don’t fall victim to a scientism fallacy. The plural of anecdote *is* data, in some observational sciences like ethnography. It’s how you tease out patterns. Not everything is physics, not everything can be demonstrated through a double-blind controlled trial.