What men don't see: How do minority judges shape majority decisions?

How do minority judges influence majority decisions? “Panel effects” occur when judges on a panel change their votes in the presence of rank-and-file minority panelists. I argue that such effects are conditional on institutional design. Courts that delegate case preparation to a lead judge early in the proceedings confer agenda-setting authority on the person who organizes, interprets, and presents the case. Panel effects may therefore follow the identity of the lead judge. Judge gender may also matter beyond sex-discrimination litigation, wherever gendered treatment shapes the litigant’s initial experience. I test these claims using judge gender differences in employment disputes between EU institutions and their employees before the Court of Justice of the European Union (2000–2025). Female judges affect outcomes when serving as lead judges, while their mere presence does not. Panel effects thus depend on institutional rules governing case management; ignoring them risks overlooking substantial variation in judging.