Judicial Credibility

30 Pages Posted: 13 Jul 2020

Date Written: June 30, 2020

Abstract

Do people believe a federal court when it rules against the government? And does such judicial credibility depend on the perceived political affiliation of the judge? This study presents a survey experiment addressing these questions, based on a set of recent cases in which both a judge appointed by President George W. Bush and a judge appointed by President Bill Clinton declared the same Trump Administration action to be unlawful. The findings offer evidence that, in a politically salient case, the partisan identification of the judge — here, as a “Bush judge” or “Clinton judge” — can influence the credibility of judicial review in the public mind.

Keywords: DACA, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Federal Judges, Polarization, Motivated Reasoning, Legitimacy, Bush Judge, Clinton Judge, Obama Judge, Trump Judge

Suggested Citation

Huang, Bert I., Judicial Credibility (June 30, 2020). William & Mary Law Review, Vol. 61, 2020, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3639213

Bert I. Huang (Contact Author)

Columbia Law School ( email )

435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10025
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.columbia.edu/fac/Bert_Huang

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
45
Abstract Views
263
PlumX Metrics