Judicial impartiality is crucial for legal legitimacy. We explore how citizens' perceptions of fairness are influenced by judges' race and gender, a topic gaining significance amid recent accusations of impropriety against female and minority judges in the U.S.

Our study investigates whether ascriptive characteristics (race, gender) affect judgments about inherent bias and recusal likelihood among American citizens, comparing evaluations across different political leanings. We find that political ideology plays a significant role: starkly different assessments occur for female and Hispanic judges depending on whether they are perceived by self-identified right- or left-leaning individuals.

Specifically:

Citizens use race/gender to infer which groups* judges might favor.

* These traits influence views of inherent bias, even absent specific case details.

* They also impact recusal decisions regarding minority and female judges.

This effect is particularly notable across the political divide. While white male judges are consistently viewed as impartial regardless of political leaning, our findings suggest substantial reliance on demographic characteristics when judging fairness for other groups within the judiciary.