Reassessing the Impact of Supreme Court Decisions on Public Opinion: Gay Civil Rights Cases

J. Stoutenborough, Donald P. Haider‐Markel, M. Allen
{"title":"Reassessing the Impact of Supreme Court Decisions on Public Opinion: Gay Civil Rights Cases","authors":"J. Stoutenborough, Donald P. Haider‐Markel, M. Allen","doi":"10.1177/106591290605900310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The theoretical and empirical debate over the ability of the U.S. Supreme Court to influence public opinion through its decisions is far from settled. Scholars have examined the question using a variety of theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence, but there is no theoretical consensus, nor are the empirical studies without methodological weaknesses. We enter this debate in an attempt to bring some clarity to the theoretical approaches, overcome some of the methodological shortcomings, and bring a yet unstudied issue area, Court decisions on gay civil rights, under scrutiny. We argue that the ability of Court decisions to influence public opinion is a function of the salience of the issue, the political context, and case specific factors at the aggregate level. At the individual level these factors are also relevant, but citizen characteristics must also be taken into consideration. Our analysis of aggregate level and individual level opinion does indeed suggest that Court decisions can influence public opinion. However, the ability of Court decisions to influence public opinion is conditional. Our findings lend support to the legitimation hypothesis and the structural effects model. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our findings and suggestions for future research.","PeriodicalId":394472,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly (formerly WPQ)","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"86","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Research Quarterly (formerly WPQ)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591290605900310","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 86

Abstract

The theoretical and empirical debate over the ability of the U.S. Supreme Court to influence public opinion through its decisions is far from settled. Scholars have examined the question using a variety of theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence, but there is no theoretical consensus, nor are the empirical studies without methodological weaknesses. We enter this debate in an attempt to bring some clarity to the theoretical approaches, overcome some of the methodological shortcomings, and bring a yet unstudied issue area, Court decisions on gay civil rights, under scrutiny. We argue that the ability of Court decisions to influence public opinion is a function of the salience of the issue, the political context, and case specific factors at the aggregate level. At the individual level these factors are also relevant, but citizen characteristics must also be taken into consideration. Our analysis of aggregate level and individual level opinion does indeed suggest that Court decisions can influence public opinion. However, the ability of Court decisions to influence public opinion is conditional. Our findings lend support to the legitimation hypothesis and the structural effects model. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our findings and suggestions for future research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新评估最高法院判决对公众舆论的影响:同性恋民权案件
关于美国最高法院通过其裁决影响公众舆论的能力的理论和实证争论远未解决。学者们用各种理论视角和经验证据来研究这个问题,但没有理论共识,经验研究也不是没有方法上的弱点。我们进入这场辩论的目的是为了使理论方法更加清晰,克服一些方法上的缺陷,并将一个尚未研究的问题领域——法院对同性恋公民权利的裁决——置于审视之下。我们认为,法院判决影响公众舆论的能力是问题的显著性、政治背景和案件具体因素在总体水平上的作用。在个人层面上,这些因素也是相关的,但也必须考虑到公民的特征。我们对总体意见和个人意见的分析确实表明,法院的判决可以影响公众意见。但是,法院的判决影响公众舆论的能力是有条件的。研究结果支持了合法性假说和结构效应模型。最后,我们讨论了研究结果的意义和对未来研究的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
External Threats and Political Tolerance in Taiwan Cognitive Style and Political Learning in the 2000 U.S. Presidential Campaign Law in Action Queer (Theory) Eye for the Straight (Legal) Guy: Lawrence v. Texas’ Makeover of Bowers v. Hardwick The Role of Group Consciousness in Latino Public Opinion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1