Minimalism, Law, Ideology, and the Public Impact of the Supreme Court

Abstract

For many decades, researchers sought to understand whether courts influence public opinion and what factors moderate or intensify such influence. In this study, we elucidate these questions with an original longitudinal survey experiment (N = 920) conducted before and after a major U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing freedom of religion and nondiscrimination law. We focus on three key factors and their influence in the short and longer term: the perceived breadth of the decision; whether the decision is congruent with the background law; and the decision's congruence with individuals' ideology. We triangulate and extend our findings with data from a representative cross-sectional survey conducted by an independent research institute (N = 16,761). Our findings lend mixed support to the theory that narrow decisions can curb the public impact of the Supreme Court and expose a relationship between judicial minimalism and background laws. We discuss the implications for Supreme Court strategy and for the research on Supreme Court impact on public opinion.

Keywords: constitutional law, religion, equality, survey experiments, supreme court, judicial minimalism, ideology, framing, legal advocacy, impact litigation