This Article seeks to understand the impact women judges have on collaboration on the already collegial U.S. Courts of Appeals. Using both quantitative and qualitative data, I test competing theories that women may either increase the unanimity of panel decisions (because of women's tendency toward democratizing and compromising during group decisions) or decrease unanimity (fighting for their voices to be heard in the midst of perceived or actual gender bias). I find that, while all-women panels are the most likely to produce unanimous opinions, adding women to gender-heterogenous panels leads to heightened levels of dissensus. This, in conjunction with accounts of federal appellate judging from women, indicates that women judges may be impeded from consensus seeking by male peers.

A version of this Article was presented at the 2025 annual meetings for SPSA in January.