Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:12:27.297Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Supreme Court and Local Public Opinion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2000

Valerie J. Hoekstra
Valerie J. Hoekstra*
Affiliation:
Washington University in St. Louis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 94 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 89 - 100
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adamany, David, and Grossman, Joel B.. 1983. “Support for the Supreme Court as a National Policymaker.” Law & Policy Quarterly 5 (10): 405–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior, et al. v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Greater Oregon, 515 U.S. 687 (1995).Google Scholar
Board of Education of Kiryas Joel v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994).Google Scholar
Berkson, Larry C. 1978. The Supreme Court and Its Publics: The Communication of Policy Decisions. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Boninger, David S., Berent, Matthew K., and Krosnick, Jon A.. 1995. “Origins of Attitude Importance: Self-interest, Social Identification, and Value Relevance.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68 (01): 61–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caldeira, Gregory A. 1991. “Courts and Public Opinion.” In The American Courts, ed. Gates, John B. and Johnson, Charles A.. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A. 1986. “Neither the Purse nor the Sword: Dynamics of Public Confidence in the Supreme Court.” American Political Science Review 80 (12): 1209–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Gibson, James L.. 1992. “Etiology of Public Support for the United States Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 36 (08): 635–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casey, Gregory. 1974. “The Supreme Court and Myth.” Law and Society Review 8 (Spring): 385–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cipollone v. Liggett Group, 505 U.S. 504 (1992).Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Easton, David, and Dennis, Jack. 1969. “Children in the Political System: Origins of Political Legitimacy.” New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Finkel, Steve. 1995. Causal Analysis with Panel Data. Sage University Paper on Quantitative Applications in Social Science, 07–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, Susan, and Taylor, Shelly. 1991. Social Cognition. 2d ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles, and Kosaki, Liane C.. 1989. “Republican Schoolmaster: The U.S. Supreme Court, Public Opinion, and Abortion.” American Political Science Review 83 (09): 751–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, Charles, and Kosaki, Liane C.. 1995. “Media, Knowledge, and Public Evaluations of the Supreme Court.” In Contemplating Courts, ed. Epstein, Lee J.. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Pp. 352–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, Charles, Kosaki, Liane C., and Kritzer, Herbert. 1993. “The Salience of United States Supreme Court Decisions.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools, 503 U.S. 60 (1992).Google Scholar
Graber, Doris. 1997. Mass Media and American Politics. 4th ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoekstra, Valerie J., and Segal, Jeffrey A.. 1996. “The Shepherding of Local Public Opinion: The Supreme Court and Lamb's Chapel.” Journal of Politics 58 (11): 1079–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krosnick, Jon A., Boninger, David, and Chuang, Yao. 1993. “Attitude Strength: One Construct or Many Related Constructs?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65 (12): 1132–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaros, Dean, and Roper, Robert. 1980. “The U.S. Supreme Court: Myth, Diffuse Support, Specific Support, and Legitimacy.” American Politics Quarterly 8 (01): 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 508 U.S. 384 (1993).Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R. 1985. “Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science 29 (02): 119–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, Gregory. 1990. Analysis of Panel Data. Sage University Paper on Quantitative Applications in Social Science, 07-018.Google Scholar
Marshall, Thomas. 1989. Public Opinion and the Supreme Court. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Mondak, Jeffrey J. 1991. “Substantive and Procedural Aspects of Supreme Court Decisions as Determinants of Approval.” American Politics Quarterly 19 (04): 174–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondak, Jeffrey J. 1992. “Institutional Legitimacy, Policy Legitimacy, and the Supreme Court.” American Politics Quarterly 20 (10): 457–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondak, Jeffrey J., and Smithey, Shannon Ishiyama. 1997. “The Dynamics of Public Support for the Supreme Court.” Journal of Politics 59 (11): 1114–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, Walter F., and Tanenhaus, Joseph. 1968. “Public Opinion and the United States Supreme Court: A Preliminary Mapping of Some Prerequisites for Court Legitimation of Regime Changes.” Law and Society Review 2 (05): 357–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Chickasaw Nation, 515 U.S. 450 (1995).Google Scholar
Petty, Richard E., and Cacioppo, John T.. 1986. “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. Berkowitz, Leonard. Vol. 19. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Pp. 123–205.Google Scholar
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833.Google Scholar
Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992).Google Scholar
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992).Google Scholar
Segal, Jennifer A. 1995. “Diffuse Support for the United States Supreme Court: Reliable Reservoir or Fickle Foundation?” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, Joseph, and Murphy, Walter. 1981. “Patterns of Public Support for the Supreme Court: A Panel Study.” Journal of Politics 43 (02): 24–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.