Public Support for Judicial Philosophies: Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2022
We examine whether the public evaluates Supreme Court nominees on the basis of judicial philosophies when presented with a description of those philosophies. Employing a conjoint experiment, we find that the public will evaluate nominees’ judicial philosophies as well as the nominees’ partisanship, ideology, and qualifications. We also discover significant differences between Republicans and Democrats. These results have important implications for the future of judicial nominations, framing, and public support for the judiciary.
- Journal of Law and Courts , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , Spring 2021 , pp. 89 - 110
- © 2021 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved.
Justin Wedeking recused himself from this manuscript because of a conflict of interest with one of the authors and appointed an Editorial Board member—Michael Zilis—as editor.