This is the "final" version of Chapter 3 of this book. Because of the way that I've produced this extract, there may be a few missing references. 2 The Yankelovich survey was the first national survey focused specifically on the public's views of the courts. There were prior studies (e.g., Curran 1977:232-34) that asked about courts in a nonspecific way; there is no way to know whether respondents in such studies were thinking of federal courts, state courts, or both. 3 One uncertainty in this analysis is how states were coded given that in some states partisan elections are used for some state courts while appointment or the Missouri Plan are used for other courts. 4 The questionnaire along with marginal frequencies for this survey can be found at http://www.justiceatstake.org/media/cms/JASNationalSurveyResults_6F537F99272D4.pdf (last visited June 5, 2013). 5 The four items in the index were "judges are trustworthy and honest," "judges are fair," "courts provide equal justice," and "court decisions are based on facts and law." 6 Gibson measures legitimacy using a factor score that is based heavily on three items: accepts that the decisions of the state supreme court are fair and impartial, believes that the judge can be fair and impartial, considers the state supreme court legitimate (Gibson 2009:1293).While the size of Gibson's national sample was about 350 overall, with only about 100 respondents in states without elections, the reported difference in Gibson's measure of legitimacy is zero to two decimal places (p. 172). 7 David Rottman of the National Center generously made these data available to me for reanalysis. State Year Case Decision MA 2003 Goodridge v. Department of Public Health 798 N.E.2d 941 (2003) State must allow same-sex civil marriage MA 2004 In re Opinions of the Justices to the Senate 802 N.E.2d 565 (2004) Banning marriage, but permitting civil unions, for same-sex couples violates equal protection