Ascendency Denied: The Removal Of African American Female Judges In Major Cities In Ohio, A Case Stud

The purpose of this qualitative study was to apply an intersectional lens to understanding the experiences of three black female judges, and their ascendency and removal from the judiciary in major cities in Ohio. Many studies on judicial diversity have focused singularly on either race or gender, with very few studies looking at the intersectionality of both race and gender. Most of these studies have been inconclusive quantitative studies, which used large datasets to examine the extent to which race or gender impact decision-making. Using a qualitative case study methodology coupled with a historical analysis, this study focused on the experiences of three black female judges in Ohio within the context of the structural composition of the bench and the political environment.;In applying an intersectional lens, while situating race, gender, and political orientation at the center of my analysis, three unexpected and significant findings emerged. The most significant of those findings was that 1) partisanship, nepotism, and cronyism rules the judiciary in Ohio; and 2) there are hidden power structures/ stop gaps that provide veto power that are built into the policy design of both the Ohio and US Constitution's, the judiciary, and overall criminal justice system in Ohio; and 3) finally, I found what I have termed stacked decks and loaded bases which are also a form of hidden stop gaps within the judiciary in the State of Ohio.;These hidden systems significantly impacted the African American female judges in my study, because they enabled political adversaries the opportunity to take away power that should have been the constitutional right of each judge, and interfered with the right of the people (electorate) to elect judges of their choosing.;Each of the three judges in my study were treated differently from their peers, they all complained of having larger caseloads than their peers, and each of them experienced accusations of misconduct that were extreme, unusual, outlandish, and extraordinary. All three judges faced significant opposition from their election campaigns, through their service on the bench, and ultimately to the time of their removal from the bench. There was also evidence that there was secret, orchestrated, and coordinated efforts on the part of their Republican adversaries to build cases against them in an effort to have them removed from the bench. In each case, it was demonstrated that the intent in bringing disciplinary and criminal charges was to pennanently prevent them from serving as judges.;The findings of this study corroborate previous findings in the public policy literature, which suggests that Blacks and women experience backlash on the bench. It also expands the backlash discussion and fills a gap in the literature by interjecting the unique and specific experiences of Black Female Democratic judges on the bench in Ohio, who also happen to be in the political minority.