Supreme Court Nominations, Legitimacy Theory, and the American Public: A Dynamic Test of the Theory of Positivity Bias

@inproceedings{Gibson2007SupremeCN,
  title={Supreme Court Nominations, Legitimacy Theory, and the American Public: A Dynamic Test of the Theory of Positivity Bias},
  author={James L. Gibson and Gregory A. Caldeira},
  year={2007}
}
Social scientists have taught us a great deal about the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court. Unfortunately, however, most research fails to consider how the public's views of political institutions like the Court change over time. But opinions can indeed change, with at least two types of "exogenous" sources - controversial Supreme Court decisions and politicized confirmation hearings - providing engines for attitude change. Events such as these may awaken attitudes from their hibernation… 

Figures and Tables from this paper

'New-Style' Judicial Campaigns and the Legitimacy of State High Courts: Results from a National Survey
Institutional legitimacy is perhaps the most important political capital courts possess. Many believe, however, that the legitimacy of elected state courts is being threatened by the rise of
“New-Style” Judicial Campaigns and the Legitimacy of State High Courts
Judicial elections in the American states became considerably more complicated with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Republican Party of Minnesota v White. That ruling extended free speech rights
The Rule of Law is Dead! Long Live the Rule of Law!
Polls show that a significant proportion of the public considers judges to be political. This result holds whether Americans are asked about Supreme Court justices, federal judges, state judges, or
Predicting public approval of Supreme Court nominees: examining factors influe ncing mass public opinion of stealth nominees in the post-Bork
Conventional wisdom asserts that the American public is ignorant of the Supreme Court and thus, the opinions of average citizens are irrelevant, both in the confirmation debates regarding nominees to
Campaigning for the Bench: The Corrosive Effects of Campaign Speech?
A new era has emerged in the ways in which candidates for state judicial office campaign. In the past, judicial elections were largely devoid of policy content, with candidates typically touting
Give Chance a Chance: An Alternative Process for Selecting U.S. Supreme Court Justices
This article develops the proposal that U.S. Supreme Court Justices should be selected by sortition. The greatest threat to the legitimacy of the Supreme Court emanates from ever more politicized
Antecedents of trust in the judiciary: between fair process and high satisfaction
Abstract This article explains the antecedents of trust in the judiciary. We question both the contention that procedural justice is a main explanation of trust in the judiciary and outcome-based
The Supreme Court Appointment Process: Lessons from Filling the Rehnquist and O'Connor Vacancies
The 11 years from 1994 to 2005 comprised the second-longest period without an appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court (Epstein et al. 2003, 353). The nominations of John Roberts in 2005 and Samuel

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 49 REFERENCES
Defenders of Democracy? Legitimacy, Popular Acceptance, and the South African Constitutional Court
The question of how courts in newly emerging democracies are able to act in a “counter-majoritarian” fashion is of burning theoretical and practical importance. Consequently, we investigate the
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 on
The Importance of Being Positive: The Nature and Function of Judicial Review
This lecture advances a positive theory of judicial review. Most legal theory about judicial review is normative: it envisions judicial review as posing either a hope for, or a threat to, democracy.
Why Do People Accept Public Policies They Oppose? Testing Legitimacy Theory with a Survey-Based Experiment
The orthodox answer to the question posed in the title of this article is that the legitimacy of institutions has something to do with acquiescence to unwelcome public policy decisions. We
The Legitimacy of the Court of Justice in the European Union: Models of Institutional Support
Using a survey of mass publics, we investigate the political legitimacy of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. To what degree does the Court have the visibility and diffuse support
Campaigning for the Supreme Court: The Dynamics of Public Opinion on the Thomas Nomination
Little of the considerable research devoted to the connections between the Supreme Court and the mass public has addressed popular attitudes toward nominees to the High Bench. Here we hope to
Knowing About Courts
Conventional wisdom holds that the American people are woefully ignorant about law and courts. In light of this ignorance, many question whether the public should play a role in the judicial process,
Ideological Divergence and Public Support for the Supreme Court
We examine the degree to which aggregate-level support for the Supreme Court is a function of its divergence from the ideological mood of the country. We first overcome the problem of irregular and
Children's Images of the Supreme Court: A Preliminary Mapping
Social scientists have offered numerous explanations for the support the public accords to the United States Supreme Court. Easton and Dennis have advanced the contention that such support is at
The Legitimacy of Transnational Legal Institutions: Compliance, Support, and the European Court of Justice
Theory: We use competing propositions from the literature on institutional legitimacy and compliance to trace the sources of acceptance of, or the propensity to comply with, judicial decisions.
...
...