An experimental investigation of the effect of supreme court justices' public rhetoric on perceptions of judicial legitimacy

Abstract

Public support for the US Supreme Court has been trending downward for more than a decade. High-profile decisions and hotly contested nominations have drawn the Court into our polarized politics. Recently, some justices have spent considerable time and energy giving interviews, speeches, and the like, assuring the public that the Court is an apolitical, neutral arbiter of disputes, distinct from the "political"branches. In this context, we turn to an understudied potential source of judicial legitimacy: The off-bench public rhetoric of Supreme Court justices. In this article, we present evidence from three original survey experiments to argue that Supreme Court justices' off-bench rhetoric can powerfully influence public perceptions of the Court's institutional legitimacy. Furthermore, these studies show that performance approval is key to changes in legitimacy: Respondents who disapprove of a Court decision were immune to the effects of justices' rhetoric.