ABSTRACT. Although women outnumber men entering law school, women remain underrepresented in the judiciary. In 2007, women comprised approximately 23 percent of federal judges and 21 percent of state judges. This article examines if and how women's different experiences, attitudes, and values affect jurisprudence. Specifically, what can qualitative research tell us about gendered “voices” and judicial representation? We explore these questions with a sample of 13 female family court judges from one Eastern state. While the judges acknowledged and sometimes even celebrated how being female affected their jurisprudence, they also simultaneously downplayed gender differences. Our respondents stressed that they believe that both male and female judges ultimately reach the same legal conclusion, but they do so by following different gender-related paths. Despite the judges' ambiguity, we found support for Gilligan's different voice perspective and the role that gender may play in legal reasoning; the majority of judges believed that being a woman plays a part in the “voice” they brought to the bench.