Supreme Court Polarization and Its Effects on Judicial Decision Making, the Media, and Institutional Legitimacy

随着时间的推移，美国最高法院在意识形态上变得更加两极分化，随着更多的大法官出现在意识形态光谱的两端，最高法院S的中心正在缩小。这在一定程度上是因为总统、参议员和政策小组越来越重视任命过程中的意识形态兼容性和可靠性。该项目将记录几个法院时代的两极分化程度，突出低至高度两极分化的时期。由于最高法院在决定美国政治中一些最重要的问题时变得越来越分裂，每个空缺都代表着一个机会，可以塑造最高法院的长期方向--S的裁决。该项目试图解释两极分化对最高法院的重要性？S在美国政府中的角色。该项目由五个部分组成。首先，这项研究将包括对自1946年以来最高法院两极分化水平变化的广泛数据和统计分析，衡量法官？？摇摆能力？以确定在特定时期有多少法官是摇摆不定的法官，而不是可靠的理论家。其次，该项目将包括对两极分化如何影响最高法院S的决策方向的统计分析，同时测试是否存在至少一个摇摆不定的司法，从而在一段时间内维持相当温和的政策产出。第三，通过分析最高法院的投票数据，该项目旨在解释一个？两极分化悖论？：随着法院两极分化随着时间的推移而增加，分歧很大(5比4)的案件结果和一致裁决的比率都上升了。第四，通过对媒体对法院的报道进行内容分析？S随着时间的推移，将分析媒体对法院的报道是否在两极分化的时代比在较少两极分化的时代更具政治性而不那么法律化。最后，该项目将考察两极分化如何影响最高法院作为宪法意义在美国政治中的最终仲裁者的合法性和权威性。该项目将使用一种实验性的方法，测试两极分化的最高法院是否比两极分化程度较低的最高法院在公众中获得的合法性水平更低。

The U.S. Supreme Court has become more ideologically polarized over time, with the Court?s center shrinking as more justices populate each end of the ideological spectrum. This has occurred, in part, because Presidents, Senators, and policy groups have increasingly prioritized ideological compatibility and reliability in the appointment process. This project will document the degree of polarization over several Court eras, highlighting periods of low to high polarization. Because the Court has become increasingly divided as it decides some of the most important issues in American politics, each vacancy represents an opportunity to shape the long-term direction of the Court?s decision making. The project seeks to explain how and why polarization matters for the Court?s role in American government. The project consists of five components. First, the study will include extensive data and statistical analyses of the changing levels of Court polarization since 1946, measuring justices? ?swing capacities? to determine how many justices in a given period were swing justices vis-à-vis reliable ideologues. Second, the project will include statistical analyses of how polarization has influenced the direction of the Court?s decision making, while testing whether the existence of at least one swing justice sustains fairly moderate policy outputs over time. Third, by analyzing Supreme Court voting data, the project aims to explain a ?polarization paradox?: As Court polarization has increased over time, both the rates of closely-divided (5-4) case outcomes and of unanimous decisions have escalated. Fourth, by engaging in content-analyzes of media coverage of the Court?s rulings over time, the study will analyze whether the media report on the Court in more political and less legalistic terms in polarized eras relative to less polarized eras. Finally, the project will examine how polarization influences the legitimacy and authority of the Court as the final arbiter of constitutional meaning in American politics. Using an experimental approach, this project will test whether a polarized Supreme Court elicits lower levels of legitimacy from the mass public than a less polarized Court.