The Supreme Court and Local Public Opinion

2000 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie J. Hoekstra
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Mass Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Important People ◽  
Panel Studies

Most research suggests that the mass public knows very little about the Supreme Court and, consequently, that decisions do not affect attitudes toward the Court. I argue that where there is sufficient access to information about Court cases and when the issues are perceived as important, people pay attention and use this information in their evaluation of the Court. The research is based on a series of two-wave panel studies that examine the effect of Supreme Court cases in the local communities where the controversies began. The results show that a substantial number of residents heard about the Court's decision and subsequently changed their evaluation of the Supreme Court, especially those who live in the immediate community. The results suggest that we need to consider other circumstances in which people hear about and care about Supreme Court decisions.

scholarly journals Connecting Supreme Court Decisions, Media Coverage, and Public Opinion: The Case of Lawrence v. Texas

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 209-230
Author(s):  
Mahalley D. Allen ◽  
Donald P. Haider-Markel
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Gay And Lesbian ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Media ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Relationship

Many scholars have examined the relationship between public opinion and the U.S. Supreme Court, but most researchers have often failed to take into account the fact that the press mediates this relationship. Due to the public’s lack of independent knowledge about Supreme Court decisions, the media has the potential to play an influential role in the communication and interpretation of Supreme Court decisions. In this article, we examine the relationship between the Supreme Court, the media, and public opinion. First, we examine whether increased public tolerance on gay and lesbian issues has resulted in increased media coverage of gay-related cases before the Supreme Court. Second, we examine how media coverage of the Court’s 2003 decision to strike down state sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas may have been associated with decreased public support for gay and lesbian civil rights. Our analysis suggests that increased support for gay and lesbian civil rights may have lead to increased media attention to the Lawrence case and that the tone of this coverage may have subsequently resulted in an observed decrease in support for gay and lesbian civil rights following the Court’s decision. We also suggest that the release of a highly critical dissenting opinion by the Court in the case may have encouraged negative media coverage and the resulting shift in public opinion. Our research has broad implications for media coverage of Supreme Court decisions.

Invoking Precedent: Discussion of Supreme Court Decisions at Circuit Court Confirmation Hearings

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-364
Author(s):  
Logan Dancey ◽  
Kjersten Nelson ◽  
Eve M. Ringsmuth ◽  
Emma Solomon
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Federal Judiciary ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judiciary Committee ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
Confirmation Hearings ◽  
Rare Opportunity

Judicial confirmation hearings offer a rare opportunity for senators to engage in a public exchange with current and future members of the federal judiciary. Below the Supreme Court level, however, we know relatively little about how members of the Judiciary Committee use these hearings. In this article, we examine senator mentions of Supreme Court cases at circuit court confirmation hearings between 1993 and 2012 to test whether these hearings serve as a venue for position-taking, as well as for interbranch dialogue. We find evidence that senators do reference decisions in ways that seem motivated by electoral considerations. However, we also find that hearings are frequently used as a forum for interbranch dialogue over Supreme Court cases. When used in this fashion, the dialogue is often focused on cases that challenge congressional power. The results suggest that confirmation hearings are an underappreciated venue for interbranch conversations.

Amy and Drew: Two Children Who Helped Determine What Free Appropriate Public Education Means

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 29-32
Author(s):  
Alice M. Hammel
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Music Classrooms

Two Supreme Court cases have served to frame our legal rights and responsibilities regarding a Free Appropriate Public Education for students in our music classrooms and ensembles. This article serves as record of the two cases and their merits, according to the Supreme Court, as well as the actions recommended based on the court decisions.

Public Opinion and the U.S. Supreme Court: FDR's Court-packing Plan

1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 1139-1153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Caldeira
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Mass Media ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Critical Periods ◽  
Gallup Poll ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Historical Episode ◽  
The Mass Media

I show the intimate connection between the actions of the justices and support for the Supreme Court during one of the most critical periods of U.S. political history, the four months of 1937 during which Franklin D. Roosevelt sought legislation to “pack” the high bench with friendly personnel. Over the period from 3 February through 10 June 1937, the Gallup Poll queried national samples on 18 separate occasions about FDR's plan. These observations constitute the core of my analyses. I demonstrate the crucial influence of judicial behavior and the mass media in shaping public opinion toward the Supreme Court. This research illuminates the dynamics of public support for the justices, contributes to a clearer understanding of an important historical episode, shows the considerable impact of the mass media on public attitudes toward the Court, and adds more evidence on the role of political events in the making of public opinion.

EXPRESSIVE MEANING, RACE, AND THE LAW:

Legal Theory ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-99
Author(s):  
Andrew Altman
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Expressive Meaning ◽  
The Law

Recently, legal and social thinkers have turned to the idea that actions possess a nonlinguistic meaning, called “expressive meaning.” In this article I examine the idea of expressive meaning and its role in legal reasoning. My focus is on a series of U.S. Supreme Court cases involving constitutional challenges to election districts drawn on the basis of race. The Supreme Court used the idea of expressive meaning in striking down the districts. After explicating the idea of expressive meaning, I explain and criticize the Court’s reasoning. I distinguish the approach of Justices Thomas and Scalia, who hold that all uses of race in districting do constitutional harm, from that of Justice O’Connor, who distinguishes uses of race that do constitutional harm from those that do not. I contend that Justice O’Connor is right to make the distinction but she draws the line using a questionable standard. A more defensible standard would be more accommodating to the districts that the Court invalidated.

Justice Speaks, but Who’s Listening? Mass Public Awareness of US Supreme Court Cases

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew P. Hitt ◽  
Kyle L. Saunders ◽  
Kevin M. Scott
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Mass Public ◽  
Us Supreme Court
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document