Courts, Legislatures, and Ballot Initiatives: How Policy Venue Affects Public Acceptance

Abstract

Is the public more supportive of policies when they are produced by a court, by a legislature, or by citizens voting on a ballot initiative? In particular, are court-produced prescriptions more unpopular precisely because they have emerged from anti-majoritarian institutions? Using an experimental survey, we find strong evidence that state-level policy venue does indeed color the way individuals perceive policies – largely in ways that flow from popular conceptions of democratic theory. Individuals are more likely to agree with, and less willing to work against, policies that have been produced by their fellow citizens. Meanwhile, they are least likely to support policies that have come from the courts. However, the effect of policy venue differs dramatically between self-identified partisans and Independents, suggesting that Independents may value the partisan neutrality of courts more than bemoan their antimajoritarian tendencies. These findings have important implications for public opinion scholars, pollsters, and policy entrepreneurs seeking to promote their agenda through these state-level venues.