Book contents
- Curbing the Court
- Curbing the Court
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Acknowledgments
- 1 The Guardians of Judicial Independence
- 2 Theories of Public Support for Court-Curbing
- 3 A Deep Dive into Supreme Court Evaluation and Support
- 4 General Policy Disagreement and Broadly Targeted Court-Curbing
- 5 Specific Policy Disagreement and Support for Court-Curbing
- 6 Partisan Polarization and Support for Court-Curbing
- 7 Procedural Perceptions and Motivated Reasoning
- 8 Reconsidering the Public Foundations of Judicial Independence
- References
- Index
1 - The Guardians of Judicial Independence
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 August 2020
- Curbing the Court
- Curbing the Court
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Acknowledgments
- 1 The Guardians of Judicial Independence
- 2 Theories of Public Support for Court-Curbing
- 3 A Deep Dive into Supreme Court Evaluation and Support
- 4 General Policy Disagreement and Broadly Targeted Court-Curbing
- 5 Specific Policy Disagreement and Support for Court-Curbing
- 6 Partisan Polarization and Support for Court-Curbing
- 7 Procedural Perceptions and Motivated Reasoning
- 8 Reconsidering the Public Foundations of Judicial Independence
- References
- Index
Summary
Chapter 1 sets the scholarly and popular context for explaining how citizens evaluate the United States Supreme Court. It conceptualizes the core outcome of interest throughout the book: public support for Court-curbing, or alterations to the Supreme Court’s powers, structures, and institutional arrangements. We compare this concept to judicial independence and judicial power, and we distinguish it from institutional legitimacy. Chapter 1 also makes important connections to the institutions literature, explaining how a politicized foundation to Court-curbing represents a constraint on judicial independence. We characterize core debates in the scholarly literature centering on “policy (or outcome) versus process.” Policy-based perspectives posit that citizen agreement or disagreement with the Court’s rulings or policy direction will influence support for Court-curbing. Process-based perspectives suggest that non-policy factors such as democratic values, perceptions that the Court is fair and impartial (as opposed to politicized), and knowledge and awareness (via a “positivity bias”) all serve to enhance institutional support for the Court.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Curbing the CourtWhy the Public Constrains Judicial Independence, pp. 1 - 26Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020