scholarly journals No home court advantage: The trump impeachment trial and attitudes toward the U.S. Supreme Court

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 205316802110530
Author(s):  
Miles T Armaly ◽  
Adam M Enders
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The Political ◽  
Willingness To Accept ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
And Behaviors ◽  
Experimental Treatments ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

Although the U.S. Supreme Court goes to great lengths to avoid the “political thicket,” it is sometimes unwittingly pulled in. We employ several experimental treatments—each of which is composed of real behaviors that took place during the Trump impeachment trial—to understand the impact of the trial on attitudes about the Court. We find that Chief Justice Roberts’ presence and behaviors during the trial failed to legitimize the proceeding and may have even harmed views of the Court. Treatments involving Roberts’ actions decreased willingness to accept Court decisions and, in some cases, negatively impacted perceived legitimacy. We also find that criticisms of the Chief Justice by Senators decreased decision acceptance. These findings clarify both the bounds of the institution’s legitimizing power and the tenuous nature of public support in times of greater Court politicization by outside actors.

Public confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court: A new look at the impact of Court decisions

2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Stoutenborough ◽  
Donald P. Haider-Markel
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S ◽  
New Look

Public Opinion and Setting the Agenda on the U.S. Supreme Court

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda C. Bryan
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Support ◽  
American People ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Environment ◽  
First Case ◽  
Setting Process ◽  
The U.S

Arguably the most influential power the U.S. Supreme Court has is the power to choose which cases to decide. This power allows the nation’s only unelected branch of government to choose either to weigh in on key political controversies or avoid them completely. Here, I take one of the first case-level looks at the role of public opinion in the Court’s agenda-setting process. I argue justices vote to hear cases when they are likely to agree with public opinion on the outcome and eschew cases when they are out of step with the American people. However, the effect of public opinion depends on the political environment, especially on the level of public support the Court enjoys, the salience of the issue, and the case’s legal importance.

The Pendulum of Precedent: U.S. State Legislative Response to Supreme Court Decisions on Minimum Wage Legislation for Women

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Hoekstra
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Minimum Wage ◽  
State Legislators ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
High Courts ◽  
Minimum Wage Legislation ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

The impact of U.S. Supreme Court decisions is contingent on the willingness of other political actors to implement those decisions. One important group of implementers is the U.S. state legislatures. However, in the pursuit of policy, state legislators must consider multiple goals when choosing among alternative policy options. In addition to considering the likelihood of review by state high courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, state legislators have their own ideas about good policy and must also face reelection. When are legislators likely to follow precedent and when are they likely to ignore it in pursuit of these other goals? In this article, I examine the enactment of state minimum wage legislation for women in the first half of the twentieth century. The results show that even after controlling for legislative and constituent preferences, legislators heed the preferences of the U.S. Supreme Court—but not necessarily their own high courts—when deciding to pass minimum wage legislation. The results point to the need for scholars of state politics to pay greater attention to the role of judicial actors when studying policy adoption and legislative behavior.

Referendum konstytucyjne we Włoszech. Jak głosowanie ludowe wpływa na system polityczny państwa?

2017 ◽  
pp. 110-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elżbieta Kużelewska
Keyword(s):  
Political System ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact

This article analyses the impact of constitutional referendums on the political system in Italy. There were three constitutional referendums conducted in 2001, 2006 and 2016. All of them have been organised by the ruling parties, however, only the first one was successful. In the subsequent referendums, the proposals for amending the constitution have been rejected by voters. The article finds that lack of public support for the government resulted in voting „no” in the referendum.

Questions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Gibson ◽  
Michael J. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
White Americans ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
The U.S

We have investigated the differences in support for the U.S. Supreme Court among black, Hispanic, and white Americans, catalogued the variation in African Americans’ group attachments and experiences with legal authorities, and examined how those latter two factors shape individuals’ support for the U.S. Supreme Court, that Court’s decisions, and for their local legal system. We take this opportunity to weave our findings together, taking stock of what we have learned from our analyses and what seem like fruitful paths for future research. In the process, we revisit Positivity Theory. We present a modified version of the theory that we hope will guide future inquiry on public support for courts, both in the United States and abroad.

scholarly journals Patterson v. McLean: A Confirmation of the New Right at the U.S. Supreme Court

2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 987-1009
Author(s):  
George M. Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Reagan Administration ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Elections ◽  
Presidential Appointments ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

In two consecutive national elections a conservative, Ronald Reagan, was elected President of the United States. When Justice Lewis Powell announced his retirement during the late months of the Reagan administration, it was apparent that the President's last appointment could shift the ideology of the Court to conservatism for the first time since the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower. President Reagan's prior appointments, Sandra Day O'Connor and Antonin Scalia, had joined William Rehnquist, an appointee of President Nixon and Bryon White, an appointee of President Kennedy to comprise a vociferous minority of four in many instances, especially cases involving civil rights. The unexpected opportunity for the appointment of a conservative jurist caused great anxiety in the media and in the U.S. Senate, the later having confirmation power over presidential appointments to the Supreme Court. This article examines the consequences of the Senate's confirmation of Justice Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court. The impact, which was immediate and dramatic, indicates that conservative ideology will predominate on major civil rights issues for the remainder of this century.

Public Opinion, Public Support, and Counter-Attitudinal Voting on the U.S. Supreme Court

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda C. Bryan ◽  
Christopher D. Kromphardt
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The U.S

Real-World Contexts

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana C. Mutz
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Production Quality ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
The Political ◽  
Causal Inferences ◽  
Camera Perspective ◽  
Degree Of Control ◽  
Experimental Treatments ◽  
High Degree ◽  
The Impact

This chapter looks at the characteristics of the experimental treatments that are used to manipulate incivility, as well as the kinds of people used in the experiments. Because of the high degree of control over the political content of the broadcasts, the participants involved in the conflicts, and the way in which the cameras covered the dispute, it is possible to draw strong causal inferences about the impact that incivility and camera perspective have on viewers' experiences of political conflict. Although the professional production quality meant that none of the subjects voiced suspicions about the programs themselves, it is still plausible that other, unidentified differences between the real world and this exchange may have altered the outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document