2017Open Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis)Open access

The Political Consequences of Supreme Court Consensus: Media Coverage, Public Opinion, and Unanimity as a Public-Facing Strategy

Michael A. Zilis

Open full text 2 citations

Abstract

This Article analyses the Supreme Court’s need to tout its unanimous decisions in light of public perception and press coverage. Zilis argues the Court is mindful of the press’ coverage of non-unanimous rulings, which are often framed in unfavorable terms. The Article then argues how public perception of unanimity in the Court can help foster favorable coverage in the press, and increased public approval, by suggesting higher credibility for the Court, limiting the public to competing perspectives, and shaping the public’s understanding of decisions through the media. The Article conclude these strategies can drive public approval and, ultimately, public support for policies adopted by the Court.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This Article analyses the Supreme Court’s need to tout its unanimous decisions in light of public perception and press coverage. Zilis argues the Court is mindful of the press’ coverage of non-unanimous rulings, which are often framed in unfavorable terms. The Article then argues how public perception of unanimity in the Court can help foster favorable coverage in the press, and increased public approval, by suggesting higher credibility for the Court, limiting the public to competing perspectives, and shaping the public’s understanding of decisions through the media. The Article conclude these strategies can drive public approval and, ultimately, public support for policies adopted by the Court.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This Article analyses the Supreme Court’s need to tout its unanimous decisions in light of public perception and press coverage. Zilis argues the Court is mindful of the press’ coverage of non-unanimous rulings, which are often framed in unfavorable terms. The Article then argues how public perception of unanimity in the Court can help foster favorable coverage in the press, and increased public approval, by suggesting higher credibility for the Court, limiting the public to competing perspectives, and shaping the public’s understanding of decisions through the media. The Article conclude these strategies can drive public approval and, ultimately, public support for policies adopted by the Court.

Key concepts: Unanimity, Supreme court, Public opinion, Political science, Politics, Majority opinion, Dissenting opinion, Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Political Consequences of Supreme Court Consensus: Media Coverage, Public Opinion, and Unanimity as a Public-Facing Strategy — Research Paper | ScholarLens