Opinion-Holding and Public Attitudes Toward Controversial Supreme Court Nominees
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6340539 |
|---|---|
| Authors | James G Gimpel (0000-0002-1656-4156, University of Maryland), Robin M Wolpert (University of Maryland) |
| Year | 1996 |
| Volume | 49 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 163-176 |
| Publication date | 1996-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Political Research Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1065-9129 • E-ISSN: 1938-274X |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/106591299604900110 |
| OpenAlex | W2034463968 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 15 |
| References cited | 36 |
This article explores the basis of opinion formation and public attitudes toward recent Supreme Court nominees. The high salience of several re cent Court nominations has transformed the selection process from an elite affair to one with a popular dimension. We develop a model of opinion-holding in response to the Rehnquist, Bork, Souter, and Thomas nominations. We find that education and having an opinion about the president are strongly associated with opinion-holding about the nomi nees. We also find that presidential approval, party identification and ideology are all highly related to approval of the nominees. The influence of age, race, and gender on opinion-holding and evaluation tends to vary with the nomination. Of particular interest is the strong link we find be tween presidential evaluation and nominee evaluation. Presidents serve as important cues for those who have opinions about Court nominees
Concurring opinion · Court of record · Dissenting opinion · Elite · Ideology · Majority opinion · Nomination · Original jurisdiction · Political science · Politics · Presidential system · Public opinion · Salience (neuroscience · Supreme court · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Psychology
How State Judicial Selection Methods May Influence Views of US Supreme Court Nominees
The Institutionalization of Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
Confirmation Politics and The Legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court
Policy Making and Appointments under Electoral and Judicial Constraints
Mass Versus Donor Attitudes on the Importance of Supreme Court Nominations
Perpetuating the Myth of the Culture War Court? Issue Attention in Newspaper Coverage of U.S. Supreme Court Nominations
The Role of Nominee Gender and Race at U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
Knowing the Supreme Court? A Reconsideration of Public Ignorance of the High Court
Public Opinion and Senate Confirmation of Supreme Court Nominees
The Supreme Court as an electoral issue
Someone like Me
How Political Signals Affect Public Support for Judicial Nominations
Political Pluralism and the Information Search
Motivated Reasoning and Attitudes Towards Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
Change and Continuity in Citizens’ Evaluations of Supreme Court Nominees
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Feminists and the Gender Gap
Predicting No Opinion in the Polls
The Political Party Basis of Attitudes Toward the Supreme Court
Evaluating Presidential Candidates
Gender Differences in Policy Preferences
Understanding court nominee evaluation and approval
Government policy and citizen passion
Public opinion and heuristic processing of source cues
Public Attitudes toward Israel
The Etiology of Public Support for the Supreme Court
Gender and Support for Reagan
Measuring Political Sophistication
A Spatial Model of Roll Call Voting
Group-Salient Issues and Group Representation
The Thomas Appointment
Public Opinion and the Thomas Nomination
Senate Process, Congressional Politics, and the Thomas Nomination
Race Trumps Gender
Public Opinion and the United States Supreme Court
A Partisan Schema for Political Information Processing
Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates
Information, Values, and Opinion
Courting Constituents? An Analysis of the Senate Confirmation Vote on Justice Clarence Thomas
On the Nature of Supreme Court Decision Making
An Impression-Driven Model of Candidate Evaluation
| Unique citing works | 15 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,88 |
| Citation span | 2009 - 2025 (17) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 15 |