Descriptive representation and public support for Supreme Court nominees

Abstract

Though the demographic characteristics of judicial nominees in the United States have gained increased political attention in recent years, relatively little is known about how they affect public opinion toward judicial nominees and courts. We evaluate these relationships in the context of race and gender using a conjoint experiment conducted during a recent vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. We find consistent evidence that Americans are more supportive of coracial nominees, particularly among white Republicans and Black Democrats, but no evidence of a similar effect on the basis of gender. Our results have important implications for theories of descriptive representation and suggest limits to its use as a means for generating political support for judicial nominees.

Are You Talking to Me? How Ideological and Gender Characteristics Moderate the Effect of Legitimizing Rhetoric on SCOTUS Legitimacy

“…Badas and Stauffer (2018) find that sharing a gender identity with a Supreme Court nominee led to increased support for that nominee even among ideological opponents, as conservative women increased their support for Elena Kagan. However, Kaslovsky, Rogowski, and Stone (2021) find no evidence that respondents increase their support of judicial nominees that share their same gender identity. Nevertheless, we expect that women with strong gender identities will be more likely to be persuaded by the copartisan female justices whom they are exposed to, as shared social identities tend to lead to increased levels of support and sense of legitimacy among the public (Mansbridge 1999;Sapiro 1981;Plutzer and Zipp 1996;Fox 1997;Sanbonmatsu 2002;Brians 2005;Scherer and Curry 2010;Badas and Stauffer 2018).…”

The Hidden American Nativist Consensus

“…Scholars have also found mixed effects of potential U.S. Supreme Court nominees' descriptive characteristics on the public's support for those nominees. Kaslovsky et al (2019) find evidence of increased support for nominees who share survey respondents' race, especially among white Republicans and black Democrats, but find no similar effect with respect to gender. Sen (2017) finds that when it is provided, information about nominees' partisanship strongly predicts the public's support for those nominees, but when it is withheld, the public relies upon other demographic cues about the nominees, such as their race.…”

Judicial Philosophy and the Public’s Support for Courts

“…Whether judges satisfy people’s general legal expectations also influences court support (Baird and Gangl 2006; Ramirez 2008; Scheb and Lyons 2001, 2000). The public favors legally qualified judges (Hoekstra and LaRowe 2013; Kaslovsky et al 2021). People understand that judges hold ideological views, but they support courts “under the belief that judges exercise their discretion in a principled and sincere fashion” (Gibson and Caldeira 2011, 195).…”