Pat Chew

Sullivan & Cromwell Visiting Professor of Law

Spring 2018

Griswold 310

617-998-1672

Assistant: Patricia Fazzone / 617-496-2075

Biography

Pat Chew is the Salmon Chaired Professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and a University Chancellor’s Distinguished Teaching Award recipient. In addition, she has taught at the University of Texas, University of Augsburg (Germany), and the University of California (Hastings). In spring 2018, she will visit Harvard Law School, where she will teach a section of Torts and a reading group, Is Justice Blind?. At her home institution, she teaches Employment Law and Employment Arbitration, a seminar on the Reasonableness Standard across different subject areas, and a seminar on criminal expungement. She has presented and consulted with dozens of law schools, and more recently, with judicial groups all over the country.

Her research is diverse, both in subject areas and methodologies. She has written dozens of articles in both general interest and specialized law journals. The most read American Bar Association (ABA) article in 2010 focused on her empirical work on judges. She also has authored or edited numerous books, treatises and casebooks in dispute resolution, business laws, and culture and conflict. They include INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION: CONSENSUAL ADR PROCESSES (coauthored) and THE CONFLICT AND CULTURE READER. Professor Chew is the inaugural recipient of the Keith Aoki Excellence in Asian American Jurisprudence Award. Most recently, she is researching how the market and cultural contexts of arbitrations affect their outcomes.

Among other leadership roles, Professor Chew was on the Executive Committee of the American Association of Law Schools (AALS) (the Association’s board of directors), the Chair of the AALS Section on Women in Legal Education (the largest AALS section), a Council member of the General Practice Division of the American Bar Association (ABA), and a co-founder of the Asian-American Pacific Islander law faculty conference. She is a member of the American Law Institute (ALI). Over the years, she has served on many committees and spoken at dozens of programs for the AALS, the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC), the ABA, and for audiences all over the world.

Prior to teaching, she practiced corporate and international law with Baker & McKenzie in Chicago and in San Francisco. Professor Chew received a J.D. degree and a graduate degree in Education Psychology from the University of Texas and an undergraduate degree in psychology from Stanford University. The youngest of six children, she grew up in El Paso, Texas in a Chinese-American family. Her spouse is a management consultant and a business school professor. They have two adult children.

Pat K. Chew, Seeing Subtle Racism, 6 Stan. J. C.R. & C.L. 183 (2010).
Categories:
Disciplinary Perspectives & Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
,
Labor & Employment
Sub-Categories:
Discrimination
,
Race & Ethnicity
,
Empirical Legal Studies
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Employment Discrimination
Type: Article
Abstract
Traditional employment discrimination law does not offer remedies for subtle bias in the workplace. For instance, in empirical studies of racial harassment cases, plaintiffs are much more likely to be successful if they claim egregious and blatant racist incidents rather than more subtle examples of racial intimidation, humiliation, or exclusion. But some groundbreaking jurists are cognizant of the reality and harm of subtle bias - and are acknowledging them in their analysis in racial harassment cases. While not yet widely recognized, the jurists are nonetheless creating important precedents for a re-interpretation of racial harassment jurisprudence, and by extension, employment discrimination jurisprudence more broadly. This article traces the development of racial harassment jurisprudence, explaining the development of the traditional model, which does not recognize subtle bias. It concludes with an analysis of an alternative jurisprudential model that "sees" subtle racism.
Pat K. Chew & Robert E. Kelley, Myth of the Color-Blind Judge: An Empirical Analysis of Racial Harassment Cases, 86 Wash. U. L. Rev.1117 (2009).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Disciplinary Perspectives & Law
,
Government & Politics
,
Labor & Employment
Sub-Categories:
Discrimination
,
Race & Ethnicity
,
Empirical Legal Studies
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Employment Discrimination
Type: Article
Abstract
In this Article, we present an exploratory empirical study of federal workplace racial harassment cases that span a twenty-year period. Multiple analyses found that judges' race significantly affects outcomes in workplace racial harassment cases. African American judges rule' differently than white judges, even when one takes into account their political affiliation or certain characteristics of the case. Our findings further suggest that judges of all races are attentive to the relevant facts of the cases but may reach different conclusions depending on their races. When race, political affiliation, and certain case characteristics are all considered simultaneously, the role that race plays loses some statistical significance (as one might expect given the increasing number of variables). While we cannot predict how an individual judge might act, our empirical analysis suggests that African American judges as a group and white judges as a group perceive racial harassment differently. These findings counter the traditional myth that the race of a judge would not make a difference — a myth premised on a presumption of a formalistic and objective decision-making process. Given the underrepresentation of minority judges, the growing minority population in the U.S., and minority skepticism of judicial fairness, this Article offers empirical support for a more racially diverse judiciary. An increase in the number of judges of color promises to increase diverse perspectives in the judicial system and to help unveil the complex reality of racial dynamics in the workplace. Our experiences instantly become part of the lens through which we view our entire past, present, and future, and like any lens, they shape and distort what we see.
Pat K. Chew, Asian Americans: The “Reticent” Minority and Their Paradoxes, 36 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1 (1994).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Labor & Employment
Sub-Categories:
Race & Ethnicity
,
Discrimination
,
Employment Discrimination
Type: Article

Current Courses

Course Catalog View

Griswold 310

617-998-1672

Assistant: Patricia Fazzone / 617-496-2075