Lawyers' Perceptions of the U.S. Supreme Court: Is the Court a “Political” Institution?

@article{Bartels2015LawyersPO,
  title={Lawyers' Perceptions of the U.S. Supreme Court: Is the Court a “Political” Institution?},
  author={Brandon L. Bartels and Christopher David Johnston and Alyx Mark},
  journal={Law \& Society Review},
  year={2015},
  volume={49},
  pages={761-794}
}
Do legal elites-lawyers admitted to federal appellate bars-perceive the Supreme Court as a "political" institution? Legal elites differentiate themselves from the mass public in the amount and sources of information about the Court. They also hold near-universal perceptions of Court legitimacy, a result we use to derive competing theoretical expectations regarding the impact of ideological disagreement on various Court perceptions. Survey data show that many legal elites perceive the Court as… Expand

Figures from this paper

Snap Judgment: Implicit Perceptions of a (Political) Court
Do people fundamentally perceive the Supreme Court as a political institution? Despite the central importance of this question to theories of public evaluations of the Court and its decisions, itExpand
Reconsidering Positivity Theory: What Roles Do Politicization, Ideological Disagreement, and Legal Realism Play in Shaping U.S. Supreme Court Legitimacy?
To what degree is the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court currently at risk? Perhaps the most widely accepted view of how the Supreme Court acquires and maintains its legitimacy is positivityExpand
Curbing the Court
What motivates political actors with diverging interests to respect the Supreme Court's authority? A popular answer is that the public serves as the guardian of judicial independence by punishingExpand
Updating Supreme Court Legitimacy: Testing the 'Rule, Learn, Update' Model of Political Communication
One of the more important innovations in the study of how citizens assess the U.S. Supreme Court is the ideological updating model, which assumes that citizens grant legitimacy to the institutionExpand
Updating Supreme Court Legitimacy: Testing the “Rule, Learn, Update” Model of Political Communication
One of the more important innovations in the study of how citizens assess the U.S. Supreme Court is the ideological updating model, which assumes that citizens grant legitimacy to the institutionExpand
Originalism, Pragmatic Conservatism, and Living Document Judicial Philosophies: Explaining Variation in U.S. Supreme Court Votes in Criminal Procedure Cases for the 1994–2014 Terms of Court
Prior research on U.S. Supreme Court justice votes and case outcomes has examined a variety of hypotheses to explain variation in voting and case decisions in criminal procedure matters. LargelyExpand
Too Liberal, Too Conservative, or About Right? The Implications of Ideological Dissatisfaction for Supreme Court Legitimacy
Scholars have rediscovered the theory of institutional legitimacy, with a vengeance. This reinvigorated attention has produced some vexing controversies, none of which is more important than that ofExpand
The Stability of the U . S . Supreme Court ’ s Legitimacy ∗
Despite the vital role that public support plans for the political efficacy of the judiciary, we know almost nothing about individual-level long-term volatility in support for courts. This studyExpand
Measuring Subjective Ideological Disagreement with the US Supreme Court
Conventional wisdom suggests that judicial legitimacy should be relatively unaffected by satisfaction with the ideological direction of judicial policy making. Recent studies challenge thisExpand
There is no legitimacy crisis: Support for judicial institutions in modern Latin America
espanolSi bien es importante para todas las instituciones politicas, el apoyo difuso —tambien llamado legitimidad institucional— es especialmente vital para los tribunales. El saber convencionalExpand
...
1
2
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 56 REFERENCES
Political Justice? Perceptions of Politicization and Public Preferences Toward the Supreme Court Appointment Process
To what extent should Supreme Court justices be appointed on the basis of ideology and politics as opposed to qualifications and ex- perience only? We examine how Americans preferences regarding thisExpand
Has Legal Realism Damaged the Legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court
Does understanding how U.S. Supreme Court justices actually decide cases undermine the institutional legitimacy of the nation's highest court? To the extent that ordinary people recognize that theExpand
Has Legal Realism Damaged the Legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court
Does understanding how U.S. Supreme Court justices actually decide cases undermine the institutional legitimacy of the nation’s highest court? To the extent that ordinary people recognize that theExpand
The myth of legality and public evaluation of the Supreme Court
Objective. We investigate the extent to which the American people subscribe to the myth of legality-the notion that the Supreme Court's decisions are based on legal principles rather than onExpand
On the Ideological Foundations of Supreme Court Legitimacy in the American Public
Conventional wisdom says that individuals’ ideological preferences do not influence Supreme Court legitimacy orientations. Most work is based on the assumption that the contemporary Court isExpand
Is the U.S. Supreme Court's Legitimacy Grounded in Performance Satisfaction and Ideology?
Bartels and Johnston have recently presented evidence suggesting that the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is grounded in the ideological preferences and perceptions of the American people. InExpand
The Legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court in a Polarized Polity
Conventional political science wisdom holds that contemporary American politics is characterized by deep and profound partisan and ideological divisions. Unanswered is the question of whether thoseExpand
Confirmation Politics and The Legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court: Institutional Loyalty, Positivity Bias, and the Alito Nomination
Gibson, Caldeira, and Spence (2003a, 2003b, 2005) expound the theory of positivity bias in their analysis of the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court in the aftermath of Bush v. Gore. This theoryExpand
The Supreme Court and the US Presidential Election of 2000: Wounds, Self-Inflicted or Otherwise?
The conventional wisdom about the US Supreme Court and the 2000 presidential election is that the Court wounded itself by participating in such a partisan dispute. By ‘wounded’ people mean that theExpand
Framing Support for the Supreme Court in the Aftermath of Bush v. Gore
Public support for political actors and institutions depends on the frames emphasized in elite debate, especially following a political controversy. In the aftermath of Bush v. Gore, the SupremeExpand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...