Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T18:55:45.432Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Legitimacy of National High Courts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

James L. Gibson ,
Gregory A. Caldeira  and
Vanessa A. Baird
James L. Gibson
Affiliation:
University of Houston
Gregory A. Caldeira
Affiliation:
The Ohio State University
Vanessa A. Baird
Affiliation:
University of Houston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to examine theories of diffuse support and institutional legitimacy by testing hypotheses about the interrelationships among the salience of courts, satisfaction with court outputs, and diffuse support for national high courts. Like our predecessors, we are constrained by essentially cross-sectional data; unlike them, we analyze mass attitudes toward high courts in eighteen countries. Because our sample includes many countries with newly formed high courts, our cross-sectional data support several longitudinal inferences, using the age of the judicial institution as an independent variable. We discover that the U.S. Supreme Court is not unique in the esteem in which it is held and, like other courts, it profits from a tendency of people to credit it for pleasing decisions but not to penalize it for displeasing ones. Generally, older courts more successfully link specific and diffuse support, most likely due to satisfying successive, nonoverlapping constituencies.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 92 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 343 - 358
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adamany, David, and Grossman, Joel. 1983. “Support for the Supreme Court as a National Policymaker.” Law & Policy Quarterly 5(October):405–37.Google Scholar
Alivizatos, Nicos. 1995. “Judges as Veto Players.” In Parliaments and Majority Rule in Western Europe, ed. Doring, Herbert. New York: St. Martin's. Pp. 566–91.Google Scholar
Barzilai, Gad, with Yuchtman-Yaar, Ephraim and Segal, Zeev. 1994. “Supreme Courts and Public Opinion: General Paradigms and the Israeli Case.” Law and Courts 4(Winter):3–6.Google Scholar
Boynton, G. R., and Loewenberg, Gerhard. 1973. “The Development of Public Support for Parliament in Germany, 1951–1959.” British Journal of Political Science 3(April): 169–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A. 1977. “Children's Images of the Supreme Court: A Preliminary Analysis.” Law and Society Review 11(Summer):851–71.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A. 1986. “Neither the Purse Nor the Sword: Dynamics of Public Confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Political Science Review 80(December):1209–26.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A. 1991. “Courts and Public Opinion.” In The American Courts: A Critical Assessment, ed. Gates, John B. and Johnson, Charles A.. Washington: CQ Press. Pp. 303–34.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Gibson, James L.. 1992. “The Etiology of Public Support for the Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 36(August):635–64.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Gibson, James L.. 1995. “The Legitimacy of the Court of Justice in the European Union: Models of Institutional Support.” American Political Science Review 89(June): 356–76.Google Scholar
Cappelletti, Mauro. 1989. The Judicial Process in Comparative Perspective. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Casey, Gregory. 1974. “The Supreme Court and Myth: An Empirical Investigation.” Law and Society Review 8(Spring):385–419.Google Scholar
David, Rene, and Brierly, John E. C.. 1978. Major Legal Systems in the World Today. 2d ed. London: Stevens.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Easton, David, and Dennis, Jack. 1969. Children in the Political System: Origins of Political Legitimacy. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Epp, Charles R. 1996. “Do Bills of Rights Matter? The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” American Political Science Review 90(December):765–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1989. “Understandings of Justice: Institutional Legitimacy, Procedural Justice, and Political Tolerance.” Law & Society Review 23(August):469–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1998. “Putting Up with Fellow Russians: An Analysis of Political Tolerance in the Fledgling Russian Democracy.” Political Research Quarterly 51(March 1998):7–37.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Baird, Vanessa A.. 1997. “The Legitimacy of the United States Supreme Court: A Conceptual and Empirical Analysis.” In Perspectives on American and Texas Politics, 5th ed., ed. Lutz, Donald S., Tedin, Kent L., and Fuchs, Edward P.. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Pp. 89–113.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1992. “Blacks and the Supreme Court: Models of Diffuse Support.” Journal of Politics 54(November): 1120–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1995. “The Legitimacy of Transnational Legal Institutions: Compliance, Support, and the European Court of Justice.” American Journal of Political Science 39(May):459–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1996. “The Legal Cultures of Europe.” Law and Society Review 30(1):55–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1998. “Changes in the Legitimacy of the European Court of Justice: A Post-Maastricht Analysis.” British Journal of Political Science 28(January):63–91.Google Scholar
Giles, Micheal, and Lancaster, Thomas. 1989. “Political Transition, Social Development and Legal Mobilization: The Case of Spain.” American Political Science Review 83(September):817–33.Google Scholar
Grushina, Natalia. 1996. “Supreme Court Overturns Yeltin's Decree on Nuclear Waste Disposal.” OMRI Daily Digest. April 5, 1996.Google Scholar
Guarneri, Carlo, and Magalhaes, Pedro. N.d. “Judicial Reform and Democratic Consolidation in Southern Europe.” In The Changing Role of the State in Southern Europe, ed. Gunther, Richard, Pasquino, Gianfranco, and Diamandouros, P. Nikiforos. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes Toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, Valerie J., and Segal, Jeffrey A.. 1996. “The Shepherding of Local Public Opinion: The Supreme Court and Lamb's Chapel.” Journal of Politics 58(November):1079–102.Google Scholar
Jacob, Herbert, Blankenburg, Erhard, Kritzer, Herbert M., Provine, Doris Marie, and Sanders, Joseph. 1996. Courts, Law, and Politics in Comparative Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent. 1989. “The Crystallization of Orientations.” In Continuities in Political Action: A Longitudinal Study of Political Orientations in Three Western Democracies, ed. Jennings, M. Kent, van Deth, Jan W., et al.Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Pp. 313–48.Google Scholar
Karpinski, Jakub. 1995. “Polish Supreme Court Validates Presidential Elections.” OMRI Daily Digest, December 11, 1995.Google Scholar
Kitchin, William. 1995. “Legal Reform and the Expansion of Judicial Power in Russia.” In The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, ed. Tate, C. Neal and Vallinder, Torbjörn. New York: New York University Press. Pp. 441–59.Google Scholar
Kommers, Donald P. 1989. The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Landfried, Christine. 1988. Constitutional Review and Legislation: An International Comparison. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R. 1985. “Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science 29(February):119–38.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R., and Redlawsk, David P.. 1996. “Diffuse and Specific Support for the United States Supreme Court, 1980–1992.” Rutgers University. Typescript.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton G., and Taber, Charles. N.d. “Three Steps Toward a Theory of Motivated Reasoning.” In Elements of Political Reason: Understanding and Expanding the Limits of Rationality, ed. Lupia, Arthur, McCubbins, Mathew, and Popkin, Samuel. New York: Cambridge University Press. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Melone, Albert P. 1996. “The Struggle for Judicial Independence and the Transition Toward Democracy in Bulgaria.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 29(2):231–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondak, Jeffrey J., and Smithey, Shannon Ishiyama. 1997. “The Dynamics of Public Support for the Supreme Court.” Journal of Politics 59(November):1114–42.Google Scholar
Murphy, Walter F., and Tanenhaus, Joseph. 1968. “Public Opinion and the United States Supreme Court.” Law and Society Review 2(May):357–82.Google Scholar
Murphy, Walter F., Tanenhaus, Joseph, and Kastner, Daniel. 1973. Public Evaluations of Constitutional Courts: Alternative Explanations. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Nelson, Thomas E., Clawson, Rosalee A., and Oxley, Zoe M.. 1997. “Media Framing of a Civil Liberties Conflict and Its Effect on Tolerance.” American Political Science Review. 91(September): 567–83.Google Scholar
Nelson, Thomas E., and Kinder, Donald R.. 1996. “Issue Frames and Group-Centrism in American Public Opinion.” Journal of Politics 58(November):1055–78.Google Scholar
Parkin, Chris. 1996. “Irish Divorce Change Delayed.” United Press International. February 8, 1996.Google Scholar
Provine, Doris Marie. 1996. “Courts in the Political Process in France.” In Courts, Law, and Politics in Comparative Perspective, ed. Jacob, Herbert, Blankenburg, Erhard, Kritzer, Herbert M., Provine, Doris Marie, and Sanders, Joseph. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Pp. 177–248.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Martin. 1980. Courts: A Comparative and Political Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Martin. 1993. “Public Law and Judicial Politics.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, ed. Finifter, Ada. Washington: American Political Science Association. Pp. 365–81.Google Scholar
Skowronski, John J., and Carlston, Donal E.. 1989. “Negativity and Extremity Biases in Impression Formation: A Review of Explanations.” Psychological Bulletin 105(July):131–42.Google Scholar
Steytler, Nico. 1995. “The Judicialization of Namibian Politics.” In The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, ed. Tate, C. Neal and Vallinder, Torbjörn. New York: New York University Press. Pp. 485–511.Google Scholar
Stone, Alec. 1994. The Birth of Judicial Politics in France. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, Joseph, and Murphy, Walter F.. 1981. “Patterns of Public Support for the Supreme Court: A Panel Study.” Journal of Politics 43(February):24–39.Google Scholar
Tate, C. Neal. 1995. “The Philippines and Southeast Asia. “In The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, ed. Tate, C. Neal and Vallinder, Torbjörn. New York: New York University Press. Pp. 463–84.Google Scholar
Tate, C. Neal, and Vallinder, Torbjörn eds. 1995. The Global Expansion of Judicial Power. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1990. Why People Follow the Law: Procedural Justice, Legitimacy, and Compliance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R., and Mitchell, Gregory. 1994. “Legitimacy and Empowerment of Discretionary Legal Authority: The United States Supreme Court and Abortion Rights.” Duke Law Journal 43(Feb-ruary):703–815.Google Scholar
Verougstraete, Ivan. 1992. “Judicial Politics in Belgium.” In Judicial Politics and Policy-Making in Western Europe, ed. by Volcansek, Mary. London: Frank Sons. Pp. 93–109.Google Scholar
Volcansek, Mary L. 1992. “Judges, Courts and Policy-Making in Western Europe.” West European Politics 15(July):1–8.Google Scholar
Weiler, Joseph H. H. 1994. “A Quiet Revolution: The European Court of Justice and Its Interlocutors.” Comparative Political Studies 26(January):510–34.Google Scholar