Promoting a Diverse Bench
An Analysis of Elite Messaging About Descriptive Representation
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6300525 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jaclyn Kaslovsky (0000-0002-4491-2891, Department of Political Science Washington University in St. Louis St. Louis Missouri USA), Albert H Rivero (0000-0002-9669-8452, Department of Politics University of Virginia Charlottesville Virginia USA), Andrew Stones (0000-0003-4683-8119, Department of Political Science University of Mississippi University Mississippi USA) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Publication date | 2025-11-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Legislative Studies Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0362-9805 • E-ISSN: 1939-9162 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/lsq.70022 |
| OpenAlex | W4413845843 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 70 |
Existing work documents how senators use their official communications to explain their Washington activities and build support in the district. However, relatively little remains known about how senators communicate about one of their most important constitutional duties—providing advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees. In this paper, we investigate how senators discuss Supreme Court nominations with their constituents, focusing on one common rhetorical strategy: highlighting the descriptive traits of nominees. Using a new dataset of press releases about nominee race and gender, we demonstrate that senators of both parties frequently discuss the descriptive traits of nominees. Next, we systematically investigate the determinants of this rhetoric, finding that shared characteristics with the nominee, copartisanship, and institutional position predict discussion of descriptive representation. Then, we use the CES to demonstrate the impact of these messages on constituent evaluations of senators; we find a modest boost in using such messages. Finally, we conduct a preliminary investigation of discussion of nominee religion using our framework. Our findings provide important insight into how senators use rhetorical appeals to appeal to constituents and make the case for diversity in governing
Elite · Political science · Politics · Representation (politics · Computer Science · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Gender Politics and Representation · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Setting the Agenda
The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited
Representational Style in Congress
The Transformation of the U.S. Senate
Do Women Legislators Matter?
General purpose computer-assisted clustering and conceptualization
Diversity for Access? Legislative Diversity, Identity Group Mobilization, and Lobbying
Insecure Majorities
From Textbook Pluralism to Modern Hyperpluralism
A retrospective on Obama’s judges
Do Americans perceive diverse judges as inherently biased
Descriptive representation and evaluations of government
How Does the Rising Number of Women in the U.S. Congress Change Deliberation? Evidence from House Committee Hearings
Gender, Race, and Dissensus on State Supreme Courts
The pew and the bench
The Role of Nominee Gender and Race at U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
Does Descriptive Race Representation Enhance Institutional Legitimacy? The Case of the U.S. Courts
Substantive Religious Representation in the U.S. Senate
A Female Policy Premium? Agency Context and Women’s Leadership in the U.S. Federal Bureaucracy
The nature of belief systems in mass publics (1964)
Gendered Priorities? Policy Communication in the U.S. Senate
Following the leaders
Local orientation in the U.S. House of Representatives
Speaking as Women
Better Too Much Than Not Enough
"Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent "Yes
Legislative Effectiveness in the United States Senate
Because He Is Gay
The Changing Dynamics of Senate Voting on Supreme Court Nominees
Descriptive Representation and Political Efficacy
Descriptive Representation, Judicial Nominations, and Perceptions of Presidential Accomplishment
Political Justice
The Supreme Court and the Limits of Descriptive Representation
The Supreme Court as an electoral issue
The politics of accountability in Supreme Court nominations
The American public's attitudes over how judges use legal principles to make decisions
Descriptive representation and public support for Supreme Court nominees
Social Imagery and Judicial Legitimacy
Cross-Platform Partisan Positioning in Congressional Speech
Someone like Me
How Political Signals Affect Public Support for Judicial Nominations
The Effects of Political Representation on the Electoral Advantages of House Incumbents
Revisiting Descriptive Representation in Congress
The Strengthening of Partisan Affect
The Symbolic Benefits of Descriptive and Substantive Representation
The Influence of Descriptive Representation on Support for Judicial Nominees and the US Supreme Court
How police agency diversity, policies, and outcomes shape citizen trust and willingness to engage
Scoring Points
Extremity in Congress
Stop, Collaborate, and Listen
Representation and Backlash
Female Candidates and Legislators
Fear and Loathing across Party Lines
Spirals of Trust? The Effect of Descriptive Representation on the Relationship between Citizens and Their Government
Explaining Explanations
Black Politicians Are More Intrinsically Motivated to Advance Blacks’ Interests
Congressional Representation
Lobbying for Justice
Ascriptive Characteristics and Perceptions of Impropriety in the Rule of Law
The Role of Rules in Representation
How Political Contestation Over Judicial Nominations Polarizes Americans’ Attitudes Toward the Supreme Court
Representation by the Minute
The Effect of Legislative Diversity on Agenda Setting
The Religion Gap
Gender, Race, and Interruptions at Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
Pitch Perfect
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |