Posted on 07/01/2012 9:50:07 AM PDT by Signalman
Public opinion of the Supreme Court has grown more negative since the highly publicized ruling on the president’s health care law was released. A growing number now believe that the high court is too liberal and that justices pursue their own agenda rather than acting impartially.
A week ago, 36% said the court was doing a good or an excellent job. That’s down to 33% today. However, the big change is a rise in negative perceptions. Today, 28% say the Supreme Court is doing a poor job. That’s up 11 points over the past week.
The new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted on Friday and Saturday following the court ruling, finds that 56% believe justices pursue their own political agenda rather than generally remain impartial. That’s up five points from a week ago. Just half as many -- 27% -- believe the justices remain impartial. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Thirty-seven percent (37%) now believe the Supreme Court is too liberal, while 22% think it's too conservative. A week ago, public opinion was much more evenly divided: 32% said it was too liberal and 25% said too conservative.
In the latest survey, 31% now believe the balance is about right.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
The national survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on June 29-30, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
As first noted in polling conducted Wednesday and Thursday, there has been a sizable partisan shift in perceptions of the high court.
A week ago, Republicans were generally positive about the court. Forty-two percent (42%) of GOP voters gave the justices good or excellent marks, while 14% said poor. Now, the numbers are strongly negative — 20% say good or excellent and 43% say poor.
Among Democrats, the numbers went from mixed to very positive. A week ago, 35% of those in the president’s party gave the high court positive reviews and 22% offered a negative assessment. Now, 50% are positive and only 11% give the high court negative marks.
As for those not affiliated with either major party, the positives remained unchanged at 31%. However, among unaffiliated voters, the number rating the court's performance as poor doubled from 14% a week ago to 30% today.
Among Political Class voters, positive ratings for the Supreme Court soared to 55%, compared to 27% a week ago.
Among Mainstream voters, the court’s ratings headed in the opposite direction. A week ago, 34% of Mainstream voters said the court was doing a good or excellent job and 17% gave it poor ratings. The numbers have now reversed — 22% positive and 36% negative.
Democrats are now fairly evenly divided as to whether justices pursue their own agenda or remain impartial. However, by lopsided margins, Republicans and unaffiliated voters believe that they pursue their own agenda.
In March, just before oral arguments on the health care law, only 28% gave the high court such positive ratings. Those were the lowest ratings ever earned by the court in more than eight years of polling by Rasmussen Reports. But those oral arguments convinced many that the president’s health care law might be overturned, and positive ratings for the court jumped 13 points to 41%.
In his weekly syndicated newspaper column, Scott Rasmussen contends that the Supreme Court ruling keeps the health care law on life support. “But it's important to remember that the law has already lost in the court of public opinion," he writes. "The Supreme Court ruling is a temporary reprieve more than anything else”
Most voters had wanted the court to overturn the health care law and uphold the Arizona immigration law. The court ruled in the opposite way on both issues. Most voters continue to favor repeal of the president’s health care law.
Gee, ya think?
Like when a justice decides that instead of ruling a law unconstitutional he wants to teach the voters a lesson that's it is not the court's job to bail them out from electing politicians who pass oppressive laws that exceed the government's authority?
The SC is now a joke. It has transformed itself not to a protector of our Constitutional rights but an activists court and can no longer provide us the protection of our Constitution. Proof that our entire Federal Government is more like a communists form that no longer represents the people.
“Public opinion of the Supreme Court has grown more negative....”
.
Oooh, that will really cause these guys and gals in black to have sleepless nights.
Total job security, no responsibility, not subjected to Bambicare, etc. Where do I apply?
I’m shocked, just shocked, that people don’t follow John Roberts’ impeccable logic.
How ironic. Some commentators thought that Roberts was concerned about how the court is perceived, and that could be why he switched his vote. He was concerned about the court’s rulings being perceived as fair and all that.
Well, it sure seems that people think the court makes political rulings anyway. So what did John Roberts accomplish, if he really wanted the courts to be above the political fray??????
I’m probably speaking from emotion and disillusionment to some extent, but it seems to me at this point, as objectively as I can assess it, that the system has failed and the checks and balances placed by the founders have been irrevocably circumvented. It’s not just the Supreme Court decision, it’s the cumulative effects of a thousand cuts.
It seems that after a couple hundred years, the enemies of our state have probed us and our weaknesses enough to have found the cracks that they needed to exploit to either destroy us as a nation, or make us so unrecognizable to the America of our heritage to be essentially lost.
We have become a tyranny of a slight coalition majority, and the radical elements of that coalition are trying their hardest to increase their numbers by any means they can (e.g. ‘immigration reform’ and executive orders designed to rapidly shift demographics and dilute the input of those of us who actually liked the way America was - and wanted to make it better for everyone).
One personal choice I’ve made is to exclude from my life all those who were nominal ‘friends’ who have taken every opportunity they’ve had to spit in my face and gloat whenever another stake in the heart of what I love has been placed. If they need me, I’ll help them, but I won’t subject myself to them anymore.
The time has come to elect Supreme Court Justices and end the life time tenure of what amounts to American royalty. The Obamacare ruling, especially Chief Justice Roberts obviously political reasoning, proves the Justices are just glorified politicians and not some special guardians of the Constitution.
Thanks Roberts. For trashing the only minute, modicum of hope and faith that I had in the US govt.
We have a Supreme Court that doesn’t rule on law - they rule on personal political leanings except in this case when Roberts just didn’t want to tick off the Libs. That’s tupical of Republicans in Washington, D.C.
Once the Supreme Court became a political institution, it outlived its usefulness. It should be disbanded, and states should each send one judge to serve a limited term of four years in a clearinghouse court. If the Supreme Court is nothing but a club of partisan hacks, complete with the obligatory, Republican aisle crosser claiming fairness and impartiality, it should, at least, be an instrument limiting federal power.
This whole thing just *completely* blows my mind. I’ve never seen so many contradictions & complications in one place in my life.
Talk about throwing gasoline on a fire...
(Yes, I see the consolation? of being about to repeal with a simple majority *and* taking the wind out of 0’s sails in his plan to run against SCOTUS & agree with both. It’s still an even bigger mess than what was already a nightmare)
Roberts can now attend those Georgetown parties
So the SC popularity went down, but Obama supposedly went up. All of these “polls” are total BS.
Well, I hope he gets completely lolly loop-legged & wets his pants. This was a truly rotten, twisted thing to do.
Seriously, if he was thinking that he was somehow “protecting” the court, his reputation, or legacy, one has to wonder.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.