The attitudes citizens hold toward judicial institutions are of great political significance. Social scientists are now generally in agreement that few forms of political capital are as useful to political institutions as legitimacy, and no institution is more dependent upon legitimacy than the judiciary. The conventional view is that courts have neither the power of the purse nor of the sword and are therefore dependent upon the voluntary compliance that typically springs from legitimacy. But the truth is that, however useful legitimacy may be to courts, no political institution could be effective without some mechanism for inducing citizens to believe that accepting its policy outputs is the right thing to do. Using a nationwide survey, the PI will investigate public attitudes about the Supreme Court in light of the recent nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to fill the vacancy left by the retirement of Justice Stephen G. Breyer. Specifically, the PI will test the hypothesis that attention-getting judicial events (such as the nomination of Sotomayor to the Court) will activate dormant attitudes toward law and courts. The findings from this study will enhance understanding of the dynamics of public opinion and the courts as well as provide unique insights into the process by which members of the federal judiciary are selected.
