Reconstructing the Voice of Authority

58 Pages Posted: 20 Oct 2016 Last revised: 24 Dec 2017

See all articles by Susie Salmon

Susie Salmon

The University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law

Date Written: December 21, 2017

Abstract

Notwithstanding the presence of three women on the United States Supreme Court, in terms of gender equality, surprisingly little has changed in the legal profession over the past twenty years. This stagnation is particularly apparent in the highest paying and most prestigious sectors, such as the Supreme Court bar, the top echelons of the top law firms, the judiciary, and the general-counsel’s office. Even where objective facts suggest that female lawyers should be hired, billed out, or compensated at the same or higher rate than their male peers, subjective decisions informed, in part, by bias and stereotype drive a different result.

This Article proposes that, until we stop indoctrinating law students that a “good lawyer” looks, sounds, and presents like the Classical warrior — that is, a male — these barriers will persist. For many law students, the first place they get to model what it means to look, sound, and act like a lawyer is in moot court or other oral-argument exercises. Especially in light of an overall law-school culture that reinforces the significance of inborn abilities, it is not hard to see how moot court’s frequent emphasis on “natural” oral-advocacy talent, and its implicit connection of that talent to traits traditionally associated with men, can influence how students — and later lawyers — develop rigid conceptions of what a good lawyer looks, sounds, and acts like. And continuing to uncritically teach the values of Classical rhetoric — values inherited from a culture that silenced women’s voices in the public sphere — exacerbates the problem. This Article explores the dynamics and consequences of reinforcing the male paradigm in the way we coach and judge moot court and other oral-advocacy exercises, highlights some barriers to change, and proposes concrete steps legal educators, practitioners, and judges can take to help change what the voice of authority sounds like in the legal profession. The proposed solutions should help increase inclusion not only for women but also for other traditionally underrepresented groups.

Keywords: Implicit Bias, Moot Court, Classical Rhetoric, Oral Advocacy, Gender Bias, Legal Profession, Legal Education

Suggested Citation

Salmon, Susie, Reconstructing the Voice of Authority (December 21, 2017). 51 Akron Law Review 143 (2017); Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 16-38. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2854244 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2854244

Susie Salmon (Contact Author)

The University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 210176
Tucson, AZ 85721-0176
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
211
Abstract Views
1,003
rank
144,234
PlumX Metrics