This research broadens our understanding of racial and gender bias in leader evaluations by merging implicit leadership theory and social dominance perspectives. Across two experimental studies (291 participants), we tested the prediction that bias in leader evaluations stemming from White and masculine leader standards depends on the extent to which people favor hierarchical group relationships (social dominance orientation) and their level of patriotism. Employing the Goldberg paradigm, participants read identical leadership speeches attributed to either a woman or a man described as either a minority (Black or Latino/a) or a majority (White) group member. Results show social dominance orientation negatively predicted evaluations of minority and female leaders and patriotism positively predicted evaluations of White leaders.