Alex Badas
Biographic Data
| ID | 2118057 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Alex Badas |
| GIVEN NAMES | Alex |
| FAMILY NAME | Badas |
| SIGNATURE | BADAS A |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Houston |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-6379-0375 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 20 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 220 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 20 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2018 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 7 |
The Partisan Foundations of Attitudes Towards State Supreme Courts
State supreme courts have become increasingly salient as the U.S. Supreme Court has deferred more politically contentious questions to the states. Yet, despite growing scholarly attention to state high courts, we know relatively little about how the public evaluates them. We argue that perception of a state court’s partisan composition is an important factor shaping public attitudes. Using a nationally representative survey, we find that individu…
Judicial Ambition and the Crafting of Law: How Promotion Potential Shapes Appellate Opinions
This study examines how promotion potential shapes the opinion-writing behavior of U.S. Court of Appeals judges. While prior research has explored how promotion prospects influence judicial voting, little is known about how these career incentives affect the style and content of judicial opinions. Drawing on data from the Comprehensive Circuit Court Panel Opinion (C 3 PO) database (2002–2012) and promotion potential scores, I find that judges wit…
Measuring Ideological Polarization in State Supreme Courts 1970–2019
Objectives This article provides an estimation of ideological polarization for each state's supreme court between 1970 and 2019. Methodology We measure ideological polarization using the Esteban and Ray polarization model with Party‐Adjusted Judge Ideology (PAJID) scores. Our measure covers all 50 state supreme courts from 1970 to 2019. We validate the measure by showing it is associated with a higher probability of observing a dissenting opinion…
Social Imagery and Subjective Ideological Proximity to the Supreme Court: Evidence From Evangelical Christians
Public opinion about the U.S. Supreme Court is heavily influenced by whether people perceive that the Court aligns with them ideologically. However, most Americans do not follow the Court closely enough to make informed inferences about their proximity to the Court. To explain this paradox, we theorize that when Americans perceive that they share a salient identity with the Supreme Court Justices, they attribute their own ideological orientation …
Legislative diversity and the rise of women judicial nominees in the United States
What factors lead U.S. presidents to nominate women to judicial vacancies? We argue that gender diversity within the Senate creates an incentive for the president to select women for judicial positions. We posit two potential reasons for this. First, presidents may assume that women senators care about diversity in the judiciary, potentially creating an easier path for women nominees. Second, the president may view the presence of women in the Se…
Measuring Ideological Polarization on the Circuit Courts of Appeals 1953-2022
Attention to ideological polarization in the Circuit Courts of Appeals has surged in recent years. However, no valid cross-circuit cardinal measure of polarization has been established. The lack of a valid cross-circuit measure of polarization has limited scholar’s ability to evaluate broad trends in judicial polarization and address how ideological polarization influences judicial decision-making. To address this, I develop a new measure of ideo…
The Role of Judge Gender and Ideology in Hiring Female Law Clerks
Federal law clerks play a vital role in the development and implementation of the law. Yet, women remain underrepresented in these positions. We suggest that one reason for this underrepresentation may be differences in hiring practices among judges in the federal judiciary. Specifically, we hypothesize that male judges and conservative judges may be less likely to hire female law clerks than female judges and liberal judges for two reasons. Firs…
Social Imagery and Judicial Legitimacy: Evidence From Evangelical Christians
Extant research reveals that Americans hold politically consequential beliefs about the demographic composition of political groups and organizations—even when these beliefs are at odds with objective reality. In this article, we investigate the social imagery of the U.S. Supreme Court, with particular attention to beliefs about the Supreme Court Justices’ religious identities. In survey analysis, we find that evangelicals who believe there are m…
Millionaire Justices and Attitudes Towards the Supreme Court
Measuring the Countermajoritarian Nature of Supreme Court Decisions
The countermajoritarian difficulty is central to constitutional theory. With that in mind, scholars have tested implications of the countermajoritarian difficulty by analyzing whether public opinion influences the Supreme Court, whether the Court is attentive to elected institutions, and whether the Court enacts policy change. The conclusion is that the Court is less countermajoritarian than the theoretical perspective assumes. We move beyond tes…
Gender and Ambition Among Potential Law Clerks
Law clerks hold immense responsibilities and exert influence over the judges they work with. However, women remain underrepresented in these positions. We argue that one reason for this underrepresentation is that – like potential political candidates – female law students may have lower levels of ambition compared to men. Using a survey of student editors at thirty-three top law reviews, we find that there is a gender gap in ambition for clerksh…
Descriptive Representation, Judicial Nominations, and Perceptions of Presidential Accomplishment
Some narratives claim that American presidents can increase their approval ratings by nominating members of underrepresented groups to positions within the judiciary. Indeed, public opinion polls frequently show that members of the public think presidents should consider individuals from underrepresented groups when making judicial appointments. Despite the prevalence of these narratives, little research investigates how the descriptive character…
Media Attention and Deliberation on the Supreme Court
The news media acts as a “watchdog” over political institutions by holding them accountable for their actions through critical commentary. Being that the Supreme Court rarely interacts directly with the public, the news media is the primary mechanism through which individuals become aware of the Supreme Court’s actions and decisions. Thus, for the Supreme Court, the news media’s role as a “watchdog” takes greater meaning than it does for institut…
Motivated Reasoning and Attitudes Towards Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings: Evidence from Five Nominations and an Experiment
Relying on theories of motivated reasoning, I hypothesize that individuals who favor a nominee will prefer a legalistic confirmation hearing, while those who oppose a nominee will prefer a politicized confirmation hearing. Analyzing survey data from five recent nominees and a survey experiment, I find support for this hypothesis. The results have implications for how the public interacts with the nature of the Court’s hybrid institutional structu…
The Supreme Court as an electoral issue: Evidence From Three Studies
Judicial nominations, particularly those to the Supreme Court, have been a salient topic in recent presidential and senate elections. However, there has been little research to determine whether judicial nominations motivate political behavior. Across three studies we demonstrate the important role judicial nominations play in influencing political behavior. In Study 1, we analyze the extent to which voters perceive judicial nominations as an imp…
Elevation Potential among Circuit Court Nominees and Its Effect on the Senate’s Confirmation Behavior
Using traits conventionally believed to lead to elevation from the Circuit Courts to the Supreme Court, this paper uses an item response theory model to estimate latent elevation estimates for each Circuit Court judge nominated and confirmed between 1901 and 2017. I validate this measure by showing that it predicts which Circuit Court judges are promoted to the Supreme Court and which end up on the president’s Supreme Court shortlist. Furthermore…
The Applied Legitimacy Index: A New Approach to Measuring Judicial Legitimacy
Objectives This article advances criticisms of the traditional legitimacy index as it relates to determining whether ideological distance predicts an individual's willing to sanction the Court. As a solution to these criticisms, this article develops a new measure of judicial legitimacy, the applied legitimacy index. Methods Using data from the American Panel Survey and item response theory models, this article estimates the applied legitimacy in…
Michelle Obama as a Political Symbol: Race, Gender, and Public Opinion toward the First Lady
Popular commentary surrounding Michelle Obama focuses on the symbolic importance of her tenure as the nation's first African American first lady. Despite these assertions, relatively few studies have examined public opinion toward Michelle Obama and the extent to which race and gender influenced public evaluations of her. Even fewer studies have examined how the intersection of race and gender influenced political attitudes toward Michelle Obama …
Voting for women in nonpartisan and partisan elections
Someone like Me: Descriptive Representation and Support for Supreme Court Nominees
Extant research on public support for judicial nominees finds that ideological congruence with the nominee is the most important factor in an individual’s decision to support a nominee. The research presented in this article develops the theory that for individuals from underrepresented groups, a shared descriptive identity with the nominee will moderate the negative effect of ideological distance. We test our theory using the nominations of Clar…
Someone like Me: Descriptive Representation and Support for Supreme Court Nominees
Extant research on public support for judicial nominees finds that ideological congruence with the nominee is the most important factor in an individual’s decision to support a nominee. The research presented in this article develops the theory that for individuals from underrepresented groups, a shared descriptive identity with the nominee will moderate the negative effect of ideological distance. We test our theory using the nominations of Clar…
Voting for women in nonpartisan and partisan elections
The Supreme Court as an electoral issue: Evidence From Three Studies
Judicial nominations, particularly those to the Supreme Court, have been a salient topic in recent presidential and senate elections. However, there has been little research to determine whether judicial nominations motivate political behavior. Across three studies we demonstrate the important role judicial nominations play in influencing political behavior. In Study 1, we analyze the extent to which voters perceive judicial nominations as an imp…
The Applied Legitimacy Index: A New Approach to Measuring Judicial Legitimacy
Objectives This article advances criticisms of the traditional legitimacy index as it relates to determining whether ideological distance predicts an individual's willing to sanction the Court. As a solution to these criticisms, this article develops a new measure of judicial legitimacy, the applied legitimacy index. Methods Using data from the American Panel Survey and item response theory models, this article estimates the applied legitimacy in…
Descriptive Representation, Judicial Nominations, and Perceptions of Presidential Accomplishment
Some narratives claim that American presidents can increase their approval ratings by nominating members of underrepresented groups to positions within the judiciary. Indeed, public opinion polls frequently show that members of the public think presidents should consider individuals from underrepresented groups when making judicial appointments. Despite the prevalence of these narratives, little research investigates how the descriptive character…
Michelle Obama as a Political Symbol: Race, Gender, and Public Opinion toward the First Lady
Popular commentary surrounding Michelle Obama focuses on the symbolic importance of her tenure as the nation's first African American first lady. Despite these assertions, relatively few studies have examined public opinion toward Michelle Obama and the extent to which race and gender influenced public evaluations of her. Even fewer studies have examined how the intersection of race and gender influenced political attitudes toward Michelle Obama …
Motivated Reasoning and Attitudes Towards Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings: Evidence from Five Nominations and an Experiment
Relying on theories of motivated reasoning, I hypothesize that individuals who favor a nominee will prefer a legalistic confirmation hearing, while those who oppose a nominee will prefer a politicized confirmation hearing. Analyzing survey data from five recent nominees and a survey experiment, I find support for this hypothesis. The results have implications for how the public interacts with the nature of the Court’s hybrid institutional structu…
Social Imagery and Judicial Legitimacy: Evidence From Evangelical Christians
Extant research reveals that Americans hold politically consequential beliefs about the demographic composition of political groups and organizations—even when these beliefs are at odds with objective reality. In this article, we investigate the social imagery of the U.S. Supreme Court, with particular attention to beliefs about the Supreme Court Justices’ religious identities. In survey analysis, we find that evangelicals who believe there are m…
Elevation Potential among Circuit Court Nominees and Its Effect on the Senate’s Confirmation Behavior
Using traits conventionally believed to lead to elevation from the Circuit Courts to the Supreme Court, this paper uses an item response theory model to estimate latent elevation estimates for each Circuit Court judge nominated and confirmed between 1901 and 2017. I validate this measure by showing that it predicts which Circuit Court judges are promoted to the Supreme Court and which end up on the president’s Supreme Court shortlist. Furthermore…
The Role of Judge Gender and Ideology in Hiring Female Law Clerks
Federal law clerks play a vital role in the development and implementation of the law. Yet, women remain underrepresented in these positions. We suggest that one reason for this underrepresentation may be differences in hiring practices among judges in the federal judiciary. Specifically, we hypothesize that male judges and conservative judges may be less likely to hire female law clerks than female judges and liberal judges for two reasons. Firs…
Millionaire Justices and Attitudes Towards the Supreme Court
Gender and Ambition Among Potential Law Clerks
Law clerks hold immense responsibilities and exert influence over the judges they work with. However, women remain underrepresented in these positions. We argue that one reason for this underrepresentation is that – like potential political candidates – female law students may have lower levels of ambition compared to men. Using a survey of student editors at thirty-three top law reviews, we find that there is a gender gap in ambition for clerksh…
Media Attention and Deliberation on the Supreme Court
The news media acts as a “watchdog” over political institutions by holding them accountable for their actions through critical commentary. Being that the Supreme Court rarely interacts directly with the public, the news media is the primary mechanism through which individuals become aware of the Supreme Court’s actions and decisions. Thus, for the Supreme Court, the news media’s role as a “watchdog” takes greater meaning than it does for institut…
Measuring Ideological Polarization on the Circuit Courts of Appeals 1953-2022
Attention to ideological polarization in the Circuit Courts of Appeals has surged in recent years. However, no valid cross-circuit cardinal measure of polarization has been established. The lack of a valid cross-circuit measure of polarization has limited scholar’s ability to evaluate broad trends in judicial polarization and address how ideological polarization influences judicial decision-making. To address this, I develop a new measure of ideo…
Social Imagery and Subjective Ideological Proximity to the Supreme Court: Evidence From Evangelical Christians
Public opinion about the U.S. Supreme Court is heavily influenced by whether people perceive that the Court aligns with them ideologically. However, most Americans do not follow the Court closely enough to make informed inferences about their proximity to the Court. To explain this paradox, we theorize that when Americans perceive that they share a salient identity with the Supreme Court Justices, they attribute their own ideological orientation …
Legislative diversity and the rise of women judicial nominees in the United States
What factors lead U.S. presidents to nominate women to judicial vacancies? We argue that gender diversity within the Senate creates an incentive for the president to select women for judicial positions. We posit two potential reasons for this. First, presidents may assume that women senators care about diversity in the judiciary, potentially creating an easier path for women nominees. Second, the president may view the presence of women in the Se…
Someone like Me: Descriptive Representation and Support for Supreme Court Nominees
Extant research on public support for judicial nominees finds that ideological congruence with the nominee is the most important factor in an individual’s decision to support a nominee. The research presented in this article develops the theory that for individuals from underrepresented groups, a shared descriptive identity with the nominee will moderate the negative effect of ideological distance. We test our theory using the nominations of Clar…
The Applied Legitimacy Index: A New Approach to Measuring Judicial Legitimacy
Objectives This article advances criticisms of the traditional legitimacy index as it relates to determining whether ideological distance predicts an individual's willing to sanction the Court. As a solution to these criticisms, this article develops a new measure of judicial legitimacy, the applied legitimacy index. Methods Using data from the American Panel Survey and item response theory models, this article estimates the applied legitimacy in…
Michelle Obama as a Political Symbol: Race, Gender, and Public Opinion toward the First Lady
Popular commentary surrounding Michelle Obama focuses on the symbolic importance of her tenure as the nation's first African American first lady. Despite these assertions, relatively few studies have examined public opinion toward Michelle Obama and the extent to which race and gender influenced public evaluations of her. Even fewer studies have examined how the intersection of race and gender influenced political attitudes toward Michelle Obama …
Voting for women in nonpartisan and partisan elections
Elevation Potential among Circuit Court Nominees and Its Effect on the Senate’s Confirmation Behavior
Using traits conventionally believed to lead to elevation from the Circuit Courts to the Supreme Court, this paper uses an item response theory model to estimate latent elevation estimates for each Circuit Court judge nominated and confirmed between 1901 and 2017. I validate this measure by showing that it predicts which Circuit Court judges are promoted to the Supreme Court and which end up on the president’s Supreme Court shortlist. Furthermore…
The Supreme Court as an electoral issue: Evidence From Three Studies
Judicial nominations, particularly those to the Supreme Court, have been a salient topic in recent presidential and senate elections. However, there has been little research to determine whether judicial nominations motivate political behavior. Across three studies we demonstrate the important role judicial nominations play in influencing political behavior. In Study 1, we analyze the extent to which voters perceive judicial nominations as an imp…
Measuring the Countermajoritarian Nature of Supreme Court Decisions
The countermajoritarian difficulty is central to constitutional theory. With that in mind, scholars have tested implications of the countermajoritarian difficulty by analyzing whether public opinion influences the Supreme Court, whether the Court is attentive to elected institutions, and whether the Court enacts policy change. The conclusion is that the Court is less countermajoritarian than the theoretical perspective assumes. We move beyond tes…
Gender and Ambition Among Potential Law Clerks
Law clerks hold immense responsibilities and exert influence over the judges they work with. However, women remain underrepresented in these positions. We argue that one reason for this underrepresentation is that – like potential political candidates – female law students may have lower levels of ambition compared to men. Using a survey of student editors at thirty-three top law reviews, we find that there is a gender gap in ambition for clerksh…
Descriptive Representation, Judicial Nominations, and Perceptions of Presidential Accomplishment
Some narratives claim that American presidents can increase their approval ratings by nominating members of underrepresented groups to positions within the judiciary. Indeed, public opinion polls frequently show that members of the public think presidents should consider individuals from underrepresented groups when making judicial appointments. Despite the prevalence of these narratives, little research investigates how the descriptive character…
Media Attention and Deliberation on the Supreme Court
The news media acts as a “watchdog” over political institutions by holding them accountable for their actions through critical commentary. Being that the Supreme Court rarely interacts directly with the public, the news media is the primary mechanism through which individuals become aware of the Supreme Court’s actions and decisions. Thus, for the Supreme Court, the news media’s role as a “watchdog” takes greater meaning than it does for institut…
Motivated Reasoning and Attitudes Towards Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings: Evidence from Five Nominations and an Experiment
Relying on theories of motivated reasoning, I hypothesize that individuals who favor a nominee will prefer a legalistic confirmation hearing, while those who oppose a nominee will prefer a politicized confirmation hearing. Analyzing survey data from five recent nominees and a survey experiment, I find support for this hypothesis. The results have implications for how the public interacts with the nature of the Court’s hybrid institutional structu…
Legislative diversity and the rise of women judicial nominees in the United States
What factors lead U.S. presidents to nominate women to judicial vacancies? We argue that gender diversity within the Senate creates an incentive for the president to select women for judicial positions. We posit two potential reasons for this. First, presidents may assume that women senators care about diversity in the judiciary, potentially creating an easier path for women nominees. Second, the president may view the presence of women in the Se…
Measuring Ideological Polarization on the Circuit Courts of Appeals 1953-2022
Attention to ideological polarization in the Circuit Courts of Appeals has surged in recent years. However, no valid cross-circuit cardinal measure of polarization has been established. The lack of a valid cross-circuit measure of polarization has limited scholar’s ability to evaluate broad trends in judicial polarization and address how ideological polarization influences judicial decision-making. To address this, I develop a new measure of ideo…
The Role of Judge Gender and Ideology in Hiring Female Law Clerks
Federal law clerks play a vital role in the development and implementation of the law. Yet, women remain underrepresented in these positions. We suggest that one reason for this underrepresentation may be differences in hiring practices among judges in the federal judiciary. Specifically, we hypothesize that male judges and conservative judges may be less likely to hire female law clerks than female judges and liberal judges for two reasons. Firs…
Social Imagery and Judicial Legitimacy: Evidence From Evangelical Christians
Extant research reveals that Americans hold politically consequential beliefs about the demographic composition of political groups and organizations—even when these beliefs are at odds with objective reality. In this article, we investigate the social imagery of the U.S. Supreme Court, with particular attention to beliefs about the Supreme Court Justices’ religious identities. In survey analysis, we find that evangelicals who believe there are m…
Millionaire Justices and Attitudes Towards the Supreme Court
The Partisan Foundations of Attitudes Towards State Supreme Courts
State supreme courts have become increasingly salient as the U.S. Supreme Court has deferred more politically contentious questions to the states. Yet, despite growing scholarly attention to state high courts, we know relatively little about how the public evaluates them. We argue that perception of a state court’s partisan composition is an important factor shaping public attitudes. Using a nationally representative survey, we find that individu…
Judicial Ambition and the Crafting of Law: How Promotion Potential Shapes Appellate Opinions
This study examines how promotion potential shapes the opinion-writing behavior of U.S. Court of Appeals judges. While prior research has explored how promotion prospects influence judicial voting, little is known about how these career incentives affect the style and content of judicial opinions. Drawing on data from the Comprehensive Circuit Court Panel Opinion (C 3 PO) database (2002–2012) and promotion potential scores, I find that judges wit…
Measuring Ideological Polarization in State Supreme Courts 1970–2019
Objectives This article provides an estimation of ideological polarization for each state's supreme court between 1970 and 2019. Methodology We measure ideological polarization using the Esteban and Ray polarization model with Party‐Adjusted Judge Ideology (PAJID) scores. Our measure covers all 50 state supreme courts from 1970 to 2019. We validate the measure by showing it is associated with a higher probability of observing a dissenting opinion…
Social Imagery and Subjective Ideological Proximity to the Supreme Court: Evidence From Evangelical Christians
Public opinion about the U.S. Supreme Court is heavily influenced by whether people perceive that the Court aligns with them ideologically. However, most Americans do not follow the Court closely enough to make informed inferences about their proximity to the Court. To explain this paradox, we theorize that when Americans perceive that they share a salient identity with the Supreme Court Justices, they attribute their own ideological orientation …
Judicial and Constitutional Studies (17 works) · Law (17 works) · Political science (17 works) · Law (15 works) · Politics (15 works) · Supreme court (12 works) · Electoral Systems and Political Participation (8 works) · Legal and Constitutional Studies (8 works) · Psychology (8 works) · Ideology (7 works)