司法暴政或美国司法

Lisa Matthias
{"title":"司法暴政或美国司法","authors":"Lisa Matthias","doi":"10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-SOCSCI.AYUSLA.V1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract\nThe U.S. Supreme Court is isolated from the public, yet dependent on high levels of public support to maintain its legitimacy. Due to its distance, the media has great control over how the nation’s highest court is presented to the public. Partisan news outlets cater their stories to audiences with distinct ideological beliefs, reinforcing them while opposing opposite beliefs. This can lead to partisan polarization, which has previously been exclusive to the political realm. However, recent polls have revealed an existing party gap in the Supreme Court’s level of public support, which implies a politicization of the judiciary branch. When the Supreme Court appears to be just another political institution or simply an extension of the other two governmental branches, its integrity is greatly impaired, and, as a consequence, the public’s confidence in the Justices is likely to deteriorate. This study analyzes Fox News’ and MSNBC’s news coverage of two pollogical\nstance aligns with the Court’s decision, the Supreme Court is presented as an apolitical institution, whereas it is politicized when the decision is contrary the channel’s partisan stance. This implies that the partisan divide, once only common to the political realm has now reached the\njudiciary.","PeriodicalId":91169,"journal":{"name":"ScienceOpen research","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Judicial Tyranny or American Justice\",\"authors\":\"Lisa Matthias\",\"doi\":\"10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-SOCSCI.AYUSLA.V1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract\\nThe U.S. Supreme Court is isolated from the public, yet dependent on high levels of public support to maintain its legitimacy. Due to its distance, the media has great control over how the nation’s highest court is presented to the public. Partisan news outlets cater their stories to audiences with distinct ideological beliefs, reinforcing them while opposing opposite beliefs. This can lead to partisan polarization, which has previously been exclusive to the political realm. However, recent polls have revealed an existing party gap in the Supreme Court’s level of public support, which implies a politicization of the judiciary branch. When the Supreme Court appears to be just another political institution or simply an extension of the other two governmental branches, its integrity is greatly impaired, and, as a consequence, the public’s confidence in the Justices is likely to deteriorate. This study analyzes Fox News’ and MSNBC’s news coverage of two pollogical\\nstance aligns with the Court’s decision, the Supreme Court is presented as an apolitical institution, whereas it is politicized when the decision is contrary the channel’s partisan stance. This implies that the partisan divide, once only common to the political realm has now reached the\\njudiciary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ScienceOpen research\",\"volume\":\"63 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ScienceOpen research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-SOCSCI.AYUSLA.V1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ScienceOpen research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-SOCSCI.AYUSLA.V1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要美国最高法院虽与公众隔绝,但其合法性有赖于公众的高度支持。由于距离遥远,媒体对国家最高法院如何呈现在公众面前有很大的控制权。党派新闻机构迎合具有鲜明意识形态信仰的受众,在反对相反信仰的同时强化这些信仰。这可能导致党派分化,而这种分化以前只存在于政治领域。但是,最近的民意调查显示,大法院的国民支持率存在党派差距,这意味着司法部门的政治化。当最高法院似乎只是另一个政治机构,或仅仅是其他两个政府部门的延伸时,它的诚信就会受到极大损害,因此,公众对法官的信心可能会恶化。本研究分析了福克斯新闻和MSNBC的两种政治立场与法院判决一致的新闻报道,最高法院被呈现为一个非政治机构,而当决定与频道的党派立场相反时,它就被政治化了。这意味着曾经只存在于政治领域的党派分歧现在已经延伸到了司法领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Judicial Tyranny or American Justice
Abstract The U.S. Supreme Court is isolated from the public, yet dependent on high levels of public support to maintain its legitimacy. Due to its distance, the media has great control over how the nation’s highest court is presented to the public. Partisan news outlets cater their stories to audiences with distinct ideological beliefs, reinforcing them while opposing opposite beliefs. This can lead to partisan polarization, which has previously been exclusive to the political realm. However, recent polls have revealed an existing party gap in the Supreme Court’s level of public support, which implies a politicization of the judiciary branch. When the Supreme Court appears to be just another political institution or simply an extension of the other two governmental branches, its integrity is greatly impaired, and, as a consequence, the public’s confidence in the Justices is likely to deteriorate. This study analyzes Fox News’ and MSNBC’s news coverage of two pollogical stance aligns with the Court’s decision, the Supreme Court is presented as an apolitical institution, whereas it is politicized when the decision is contrary the channel’s partisan stance. This implies that the partisan divide, once only common to the political realm has now reached the judiciary.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊最新文献
A review: CRISPR/Cas12-mediated genome editing in fungal cells: advancements, mechanisms, and future directions in plant-fungal pathology Psychosocial risks in the working environment – approaches to formative risk assessment Technological, legal, and sociological summary of biometric technology usage Policy learning from influenza and the preparedness of the public health sector: 2006/2007 influenza season in Latvia Mpemba Effect- the Effect of Time
×
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:481959085
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