In recent years the American public has witnessed several
hard-fought battles over nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court. In
these heated confirmation fights, candidates' legal and political
philosophies have been subject to intense scrutiny and debate.
"Citizens, Courts, and Confirmations" examines one such fight--over
the nomination of Samuel Alito--to discover how and why people
formed opinions about the nominee, and to determine how the
confirmation process shaped perceptions of the Supreme Court's
legitimacy.
Drawing on a nationally representative survey, James Gibson and
Gregory Caldeira use the Alito confirmation fight as a window into
public attitudes about the nation's highest court. They find that
Americans know far more about the Supreme Court than many realize,
that the Court enjoys a great deal of legitimacy among the American
people, that attitudes toward the Court as an institution generally
do not suffer from partisan or ideological polarization, and that
public knowledge enhances the legitimacy accorded the Court. Yet
the authors demonstrate that partisan and ideological infighting
that treats the Court as just another political institution
undermines the considerable public support the institution
currently enjoys, and that politicized confirmation battles pose a
grave threat to the basic legitimacy of the Supreme Court.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!