Women hold roughly 40 percent of active federal judgeships in the United States and four of the nine seats on the U.S. Supreme Court, according to Federal Judicial Center data. Female judges have gone from a single state high court seat in 1922 to sitting at every level of the American judiciary, though representation still trails women’s share of the general population and the legal profession.
The Women Who Broke Barriers
Florence Allen was the first. Ohio voters elected her to the state’s Supreme Court in 1922, making her the first woman on any state supreme court in the country.1The Supreme Court of Ohio. Florence Ellinwood Allen Twelve years later, President Franklin D. Roosevelt nominated her to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and the Senate confirmed her unanimously in 1934. She became the first woman to serve as an Article III federal judge.2CONNECTIONS. Judge Florence Ellinwood Allen
In 1966, President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed Constance Baker Motley to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. She was the first African American woman to serve as a federal judge and remained on that court for more than four decades.3U.S. National Park Service. Constance Baker Motley
The biggest symbolic threshold fell in 1981. During his 1980 campaign, Ronald Reagan pledged to put a woman on the Supreme Court, and he nominated Sandra Day O’Connor. The Senate confirmed her 99–0, and she took her seat on September 25, 1981, becoming the first woman on the nation’s highest court.4Supreme Court of the United States. Sandra Day O’Connor: Appointment to the Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg followed as the second woman on the Court in 1993. Sonia Sotomayor became the first Latina justice in 2009.5National Museum of the American Latino. Sonia Sotomayor Elena Kagan joined in 2010, Amy Coney Barrett in 2020, and Ketanji Brown Jackson became the first Black woman to sit on the Supreme Court in 2022.
Women on the Supreme Court Today
Four of the nine sitting justices are women: Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.6Supreme Court of the United States. Justices That is the largest female contingent the Court has ever had, just over 44 percent of the bench. For most of the Court’s history there was either one woman or none. Having four only became possible after Barrett’s 2020 confirmation.
Women in the Federal Courts
As of early 2026, roughly 40 percent of all 831 active Article III judges are women, and about 17 percent are women of color, based on Federal Judicial Center data. That is a sharp jump from 2020, when women were 27 percent of federal judges. The increase reflects a deliberate push during recent administrations to diversify the bench, particularly through appellate and district court appointments. Even so, women still trail their share of the general population (about 51 percent) and of the legal profession (about 41 percent of lawyers).
Article III judges serve lifetime terms during “good behaviour,” which insulates them from political pressure once they are on the bench.7Constitution Annotated. Article III – Judicial Branch Not every federal judge holds an Article III appointment. Magistrate judges are selected by the district court judges in their own courthouse and serve renewable eight-year terms, handling pretrial matters, discovery disputes, and some civil trials when the parties consent.8United States Courts. Types of Federal Judges Women have long made up a substantial share of that bench, though the numbers are not tracked as publicly as Article III demographics.
Bankruptcy judges are appointed by the courts of appeals for 14-year terms. Congressional testimony from a sitting bankruptcy judge put the share of women on the bankruptcy bench at roughly one-third, though that figure dates to the mid-2010s.9House of Representatives. Statement of Honorable Frank J. Bailey Administrative law judges sit within executive-branch agencies rather than the courts, presiding over Social Security claims, labor disputes, and similar regulatory matters. Reliable gender breakdowns for ALJs across all agencies are harder to pin down, because no single database tracks them the way the Federal Judicial Center tracks Article III judges.
Women on State Courts
State courts handle the vast majority of legal disputes in the country. At the top of those systems, women hold about 43 percent of state supreme court seats, a figure that has climbed steadily.10Brennan Center for Justice. State Supreme Court Diversity – November 2025 Update Trial courts and intermediate appellate courts generally show lower percentages, with women in about a third of those seats nationwide.
National averages hide wide regional variation. Research examining all 50 states has documented what scholars call a “Gavel Gap,” finding that not a single state has more female judges than male judges across its entire court system. Some states approach parity. Others have ratios as lopsided as one woman for every four men on the bench. The disparities tend to track differences in how judges are selected, local legal culture, and the size of the eligible applicant pool.
How Judges Reach the Bench
The route a woman takes to a judgeship depends almost entirely on which court she is joining, and the selection method shapes who ends up in the candidate pool.
Federal Appointments
All Article III judges follow the same constitutional route. The President nominates a candidate, and the Senate confirms by majority vote.11Constitution Annotated. ArtII.S2.C2.3.1 Overview of Appointments Clause The Senate Judiciary Committee holds hearings on each nominee and votes on whether to advance the nomination to the full Senate.12United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. About the Committee The American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary also evaluates nominees, rating them “Well Qualified,” “Qualified,” or “Not Qualified.” That rating is advisory, but it carries weight in confirmation debates.
State Selection Methods
State judiciaries use a patchwork of approaches. For state supreme courts alone, roughly 21 states use some form of merit selection (sometimes called the Missouri Plan), 13 hold nonpartisan elections, eight hold partisan elections, five rely on gubernatorial appointment, and two use legislative election. Trial and appellate courts often use a different method than the state’s own supreme court.
Under the Missouri Plan, a nonpartisan commission screens applicants and sends a short list to the governor, who picks one. After an initial term, the judge faces a retention election where voters decide whether to keep the judge in office.13Missouri Courts. Nonpartisan Court Plan In states that use contested elections, candidates must raise money and run campaigns, which can create barriers for first-time candidates without established donor networks. Merit selection tends to produce more diverse benches, since commissions evaluate qualifications without the name-recognition and fundraising advantages that often benefit incumbents in contested races.
Ethical Rules on Gender Bias
The federal judiciary’s Code of Conduct, most recently revised in March 2019, sets explicit expectations for how judges treat the people in their courtrooms. Canon 3B(4) requires judges to be “patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous” to everyone they deal with in an official capacity, and the commentary makes clear that this duty covers speech or behavior that could reasonably be perceived as harassment or bias based on gender, race, or other characteristics.14United States Courts. Code of Conduct for United States Judges
Canon 3B(6) requires judges to ensure that their staff and court officials also refrain from discrimination and harassment, including sexual harassment.14United States Courts. Code of Conduct for United States Judges Most state court systems have adopted parallel codes.
Why Representation Matters
A judiciary that draws from a narrow demographic slice risks appearing disconnected from the communities it serves. Since at least the late 1970s, policymakers have linked diversity on the bench to public confidence in the courts. President Jimmy Carter made diversifying the federal bench a priority in 1977, and every administration since has grappled with how well its nominees reflect the broader population.
The practical effects of judicial diversity are harder to measure. Legal scholars have studied whether the gender of a judge influences case outcomes in areas like employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and sentencing, and the results are mixed. What is less debatable is the composition itself. Female representation on federal and state courts has grown steadily over the past several decades without reaching parity, and the gap has narrowed more in the last five years than in the preceding twenty.