Citizens, courts, and confirmations [electronic resource] : positivity theory and the judgments of the American people / James L. Gibson and Gregory A. Caldeira.

Cover image for Citizens, courts, and confirmations [electronic resource] : positivity theory and the judgments of the American people / James L. Gibson and Gregory A. Caldeira.

ISBN:

9781400830602

Title:

Citizens, courts, and confirmations [electronic resource] : positivity theory and the judgments of the American people / James L. Gibson and Gregory A. Caldeira.

Author:

Gibson, James L., 1951-

Personal Author:

Gibson, James L., 1951-

Publication Information:

Physical Description:

1 online resource (xiv, 178 pages) : illustrations

Contents:

Introduction : the public and supreme court nominations -- Knowing about courts -- The popular legitimacy of the United States Supreme Court -- Institutional loyalty, positivity bias, and the Alito nomination -- A dynamic test of the positivity bias hypothesis -- Concluding thoughts, theory, and policy.

Local Note:

eBooks on EBSCOhost

Personal Subject:

Alito, Samuel A., Jr., 1950-

Corporate Subject:

United States. Supreme Court -- Officials and employees -- Selection and appointment.

Subject Term:

Judges -- Selection and appointment -- United States.

Public opinion -- United States.

Added Author:

Caldeira, Gregory A.

Format:

Electronic Resources

Electronic Access:

Click here to view

Publication Date:

2009

Publication Information:

Available:*

Shelf Number	Material Type	Copy	Shelf Location	Status
347.7314092 22	1:E-BOOK	1	1:ONLINE	Searching... Unknown

Bound With These Titles

On Order

Summary

In recent years the American public has witnessed several hard-fought battles over nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court. In these heated confirmation fights, candidates' legal and political philosophies have been subject to intense scrutiny and debate. Citizens, Courts, and Confirmations examines one such fight--over the nomination of Samuel Alito--to discover how and why people formed opinions about the nominee, and to determine how the confirmation process shaped perceptions of the Supreme Court's legitimacy.

Drawing on a nationally representative survey, James Gibson and Gregory Caldeira use the Alito confirmation fight as a window into public attitudes about the nation's highest court. They find that Americans know far more about the Supreme Court than many realize, that the Court enjoys a great deal of legitimacy among the American people, that attitudes toward the Court as an institution generally do not suffer from partisan or ideological polarization, and that public knowledge enhances the legitimacy accorded the Court. Yet the authors demonstrate that partisan and ideological infighting that treats the Court as just another political institution undermines the considerable public support the institution currently enjoys, and that politicized confirmation battles pose a grave threat to the basic legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

Author Notes

James L. Gibson is the Sidney W. Souers Professor of Government at Washington University in St. Louis. His books include Overcoming Apartheid: Can Truth Reconcile a Divided Nation?
Gregory A. Caldeira holds the Ann and Darrell Dreher Chair in Political Communication and Policy Thinking at Ohio State University.

Reviews (1)

Choice Review

Gibson (Washington Univ.) and Caldeira (Ohio State Univ.) draw on survey evidence to assess how public opinion affects and is affected by controversial nominations to the Supreme Court. Did the controversies over the divisive Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas nominations, for example, have a lasting effect on the public's loyalty to the Court and perceptions that the Court works fairly? The authors also test "the theory of positivity bias," which is the idea that anything that causes people to pay attention to courts (even controversial confirmations) winds up reinforcing the institution's legitimacy. Their findings are significant: there is no evidence that controversy surrounding high court appointments taints the legitimacy of the Supreme Court itself. In the authors' words, while "Americans may dislike those of opposing ideologies and partisan attachments, they seem to be reasonably united in their commitment to the Supreme Court." As a caveat, the authors note that in the case of the Alito nomination, those who saw interest groups' advertisements did tend to become less supportive. Thus, if the Supreme Court wishes to maintain its political capital in the future, it must avoid becoming enmeshed in partisan politics. Summing Up: Recommended. Graduate, research, and professional collections. D. Yalof University of Connecticut

James L. Gibson and Gregory A. Caldeira and Lester Kenyatta Spence

List of Figures and Tables	p. ix
Preface	p. xi
Chapter 1 Introduction: The Public and Supreme Court Nominations	p. 1
Changes in Attitudes toward Judicial Institutions	p. 4
The Theory of Positivity Bias	p. 7
Outlining the Chapters That Follow	p. 14
Chapter 2 Knowing about Courts	p. 17
Assessing Public Information about Law and Courts	p. 19
Empirical Evidence of Mass Ignorance	p. 20
Discussion and Concluding Comments	p. 34
Appendix 2.A Survey Design, The 2001 Survey	p. 35
Chapter 3 The Popular Legitimacy of the United States Supreme Court	p. 36
Theories of Institutional Legitimacy	p. 38
Measuring Institutional Legitimacy	p. 44
Accounting for Individual-Level Variability in Institutional Loyalty	p. 49
Discussion	p. 61
Chapter 4 Institutional Loyalty, Positivity Bias, and the Alito Nomination	p. 63
The Confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court	p. 66
The Positivity Theory Hypotheses	p. 69
Assessments of the Confirmation Process	p. 71
The Models	p. 72
Determinants of Confirmation Preferences	p. 85
Discussion and Concluding Comments	p. 93
Chapter 5 A Dynamic Test of the Positivity Bias Hypothesis	p. 96
Applying the Theory of Positivity Bias to Confirmations	p. 97
Measuring Change in Attitudes toward the U.S. Supreme Court	p. 98
The Model of Change in Institutional Support	p. 103
Findings	p. 110
Discussion and Concluding Comments	p. 119
Chapter 6 Concluding Thoughts, Theory, and Policy	p. 121
Caveats, Puzzles, and Questions	p. 125
Appendix A Survey Design: The 2005 Survey	p. 129
Appendix B The Representativeness of the Panel Sample	p. 131
Appendix C The Supreme Court and the U.S. Presidential Election of 2000: Wounds, Self-Inflicted or Otherwise?	p. 133
The Theory of Institutional Legitimacy	p. 135
Institutional Loyalty in the Aftermath of the Election	p. 139
Views of the Court's Opinion in Bush v. Gore	p. 144
Discussion and Concluding Comments	p. 156
Appendix C.1 Survey Design	p. 158
Appendix C.2 Measurement	p. 159
References	p. 163
Index	p. 175

Available:*

Bound With These Titles

On Order

Summary

Summary

Author Notes

Reviews (1)

Choice Review

Table of Contents