Dr. Dumas Presents Study on Gender Gaps in Lawyers’ Political Ambition

Kashmala Khan’ 29

Managing Editor

On Feb. 26, students and faculty gathered in Seabury N217 to hear Dr. Tao Dumas, Associate Professor of Political Science at The College of New Jersey, present her research on how attorney’s gender and race influence their political and judicial ambition. Her ongoing study, titled “The Ballot and the Bench,” identifies a critical paradox within the U.S. judicial system: although women now comprise a majority of law school graduates, they remain underrepresented in elected office and on the bench. 

Law stands to be one of the most prominent streams to public authority. The panel noted that more than half of the members of the 118th Congress hold law degrees, and legal training has remained a popular background for judges and legislators. However, if the access to judicial and political power is available disproportionately through the legal profession, disparities within that field will have long-term implications for representation. 

Turning the conversation towards the project, Dr. Dumas highlighted how the work began with focus groups of women attorneys and receiving their opinions on ambition. Multiple participants reported the strain of public scrutiny, the toll campaigning can take on family life, and the exclusionary nature of professional networks. This showcases that for some women, the decision to not pursue office stems more from anticipated barriers instead of credentials. 

Through thematic coding, Dr. Dumas and her collaborators built upon these conversations and surveyed over 1,000 attorneys in North Carolina to examine their interest in political office, judicial positions, and specific court levels. The findings were consistent and clear. Women attorneys were significantly less likely than men to say they would consider running for political office or seeking judicial positions. It is pertinent to note that this gender gap persisted even after demographic and professional factors were accounted for. 

Dr. Dumas went further to mention that one variable stood out across every model, which was that of encouragement. Attorneys who reported being encouraged to run for office or to pursue a judgeship were far more likely to express willingness to do so. The impact of encouragement was far greater than many of the other structural predictors commonly emphasized in research that looks at ambition. Speaking of other variables, it was demonstrated that age reduced ambition and prior electoral experience increased it, yet encouragement proved to be the most powerful and consistent predictor.

Shifting towards situating these findings within theory, Dr. Dumas emphasized the role of gender socialization. From early childhood, politics is often framed as adversarial and male-coded. This leads to women assessing their qualifications more conservatively and holding themselves to higher standards before recognizing their readiness. Therefore, ambition also tends to be a socially conditioned response to ideas of credibility and legitimacy. 

In an interview with the Tripod, Dr. Dumas emphasized that the legal profession itself remains understudied despite its significance in democracy. “Lawyers are kind of the drivers of the legal system,” she explained. While public attention often centers on judges, “most of the outcomes that are happening in law are being shaped by lawyers, not judges.” 

Speaking on diversity, she noted that the concept does not operate merely on symbolic levels. Diversity shapes case outcomes, access to representation, and even doctrinal development. For instance, in her study on tort law, she highlighted how damage caps on emotional injuries disproportionately affect women, who are statistically more likely to bring such claims. Evidently, legal structures can have gendered effects. 

When asked about mentorship, Dr. Dumas pointed to a dual challenge. A lack of role models can make it harder for women and people of color to envision themselves in elite positions. At the same time, minoritized professionals are often overburdened with mentoring responsibilities, which can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes about feminine nature and hinder their own priorities. Encouragement from majority-group mentors, she suggested, can meaningfully offset some of these structural gaps.

The panel discussion ultimately left attendees with a broader understanding of representation; it highlighted how diversity functions within networks, institutional design and everyday signals. It leaves students pondering that if ambition is socially conditioned, then so too is access to power.