Black legal theorists often believe White Americans see Black judges as incapable of deciding racial issues fairly. Using a survey experiment, we examine this by studying perceptions of Black and White judges’ fairness through racial threat and group consciousness. Results show race consistently influences Black Americans’ evaluations of judges, with Black respondents viewing Black judges as fairer on racial issues. For White respondents, race only affects their views of judges in the context of racial resentment, otherwise playing no significant role. These results highlight the complex interplay of race in judicial evaluations.

Racial fluidity and mixed phenotype have been posited as critical barriers to politicized black identity in the region. Using an original, survey experiment in Panama, this paper finds that racial fluidity and phenotype significantly affect who identifies as black, but have relatively little impact on the strength of measures of black group consciousness. Rather than reducing the strength of group consciousness all together, racial fluidity and phenotype influence the salience of different measures of group consciousness. Afro-Panamanians with phenotypic features that stably predict black self-identification express stronger beliefs that racial discrimination is a problem in Panama (perceived discrimination) and greater dissatisfaction with the social standing of their in-group (polar power). In contrast, Afro-Panamanians with mixed phenotypic features express stronger in-group affect (pride), stronger belief in the efficacy of black collective mobilization (collective efficacy), and stronger linked fate.

Cathy Cohen’s (1999) theory of secondary marginalization helps to explain why the needs of some members of Black communities are not prioritized on “the” Black political agenda; indeed, some groups are ignored altogether as mainstream Black public opinion shifts to the right (Tate 2010). However, the contemporary movement for Black Lives calls for an intersectional approach to Black politics. Its platform requires participants to take seriously the notion that since Black communities are diverse, so are the needs of its members. To what extent are Blacks likely to believe that those who face secondary marginalization should be prioritized on the Black political agenda? What is the role of linked fate in galvanizing support around these marginalized Blacks? To what extent does respectability politics serve to hinder a broader embrace of Blacks who face different sets of interlocking systems of oppression, such as Black women, formerly incarcerated Blacks, undocumented Black people, and Black members of LBGTQ communities in an era marked by Black social movements? We analyze data from the 2016 Collaborative Multi-Racial Post-Election Survey (CMPS) to assess whether all Black lives matter to Black Americans.

Using data from the 2008 American National Election Studies (ANES) time series, and the 2008 ANES panel wave, this study examines whether the intragroup emotions Hillary Clinton elicits—gender affinity and pride—are predictive of political engagement for the group she represents: women voters. We focus on voters who report having participated in the primaries and the range of potential voters who proselytize during the primary season and express an intention to vote in the general election. Contrary to the conclusion one might reasonably draw—that is, women rather than men would be more likely to support Clinton—the real question is: which women?