The story of Supreme Court politicization: The mass public v elite divide
OA Version
Citation
Abstract
This paper explores how throughout American history, a divide in opinion has formed between
the class of political elites who occupy positions of power within our government, and the
average American. Historical analyses have shown that the Supreme Court has been repeatedly
politicized to benefit politicians and activists alike, though evidence shows that there is very
little support for these types of behaviors in the public at large. Furthermore, a survey was
conducted to ascertain whether the observed divide still exists within modern America, which
provides insight into the current political stand-off that has taken place over who will the seat
on the Supreme Court vacated by Antonin Scalia. Ultimately, the results reaffirm the existence
of a two track incentive structure as it relates to the Supreme Court and nomination politics.
This method allows us to examine historical developments and buttress them with modern data
analyses to improve upon vague arguments solely concerned with nonpartisanship as it relates
to the Judiciary in the modern era. It becomes clear that, in spite of realignment and
institutional change, patterns of court politicization do not abate.