Media Attention and Deliberation on the Supreme Court

Abstract

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 institutions that often speak directly to the public. Considering this, along with the Supreme Court’s use of strategic presentation, we argue that news media attention to particular cases will influence the extent to which the Supreme Court deliberates on argued cases. We find support for our hypothesis in four contexts. First, cases with more news media attention take longer to produce a published opinion. Second, cases with greater media attention are more likely to be reargued. Third, cases with more news media attention produce a higher number of draft opinions before being published. Fourth, cases with more news media attention produce opinions with a greater share of cognitive mechanisms included in them. Our results have implications for the Justice’s use of strategic behavior and the potential constraints faced by the Court in its decision-making.

Judges Behaving Badly: Judicial Misconduct and a Threat to Rights

“…More recently, Ono and Zilis (2022) found that female and Hispanic judges are stereotyped to be biased in favor of their ingroup and thus less able to rule fairly in immigration and abortion cases. Badas and Justus (2023) find that respondents that believed there to be more millionaire Justices on the Supreme Court were more inclined to state the Court was less legitimate and biased in favor of the wealthy. Scholars have also addressed the ways in which judicial scandal can shape perceptions of legitimacy.…”

The Rule of Law in Red and Blue: Affective Polarization and Support for Legal Institutions in the United States

“…Additional research could also assess how the public responds when partisan cues compete with other types of informational cues (for example, a cue priming concerns of procedural fairness). In particular, within a polarized media environment, the cues to which citizens are exposed based on their media consumption may play a critical role in how they ultimately perceive legal actors (Badas & Justus, 2023;Baird & Gangl, 2006;Hoekstra, 2003;Zilis, 2015). This represents a fruitful avenue for future research.…”

A Matter of Opinion? How Unexpected Opinion Authors Influence Support for Supreme Court Decisions

“…Given the reality of the coverage, Supreme Court justices attempt to use the mediaworthy parts of their opinion to convey the legal soundness of their decisions and move focus away from outcomes. They approach cases with greater media coverage with more care, taking longer to write opinions and producing more cognitively complex ones too (Badas and Justus 2022). The justices can also use the opinion writer to cue legal soundness.…”