For some nominees their religion played no consequential role in the deliberations of the president who chose them. For others, religion was an important if not the primary reason for their selection to the high court. Often unrecognized, Perry identifies concern with these representational criteria of religion, race, and gender as a distinctively 20th century phenomenon. While Perry's suggestion that representation narrowly defined is relevant to court nominations, her more persuasive argument deals with the relevance of court nominations to presidential politics. She draws a link between the political coming of age of Catholics, Jews, blacks and women and the degree to which presidents have considered these representational characteristics of potential nominees.
Representation is seen as a political reward.
In some cases, the reward is paid for past support. In other situations, the reward is offered in anticipation of or to secure future support. In confronting this normative question she finds herself skating on thin ice. The book turns on a specific definition of representation. Perry's definition warrants discussion for it both refines and limits her thesis.