Supreme Court's Approval Rating Hits All-Time Low

The Supreme Court's approval rating is at an all-time low following several high profile rulings on gay marriage, affirmative action, and voting rights.

In a national survey of 1,000 likely voters conducted on June 28-29, Rasmussen found that "public approval of the court has fallen to the lowest level ever recorded in more than nine years of polling." Of the respondents, 30 percent held "poor" views of the Supreme Court. This compares to only eight percent who believe the court is "excellent" at its job and 20 percent who consider it "good."

If there's a silver lining for the judges, it's that 39 percent of the respondents gave a "fair" rating to the court and three percent were unsure. The polling center gave the data a margin of error is +/- three percent with a 95 percent level of confidence.

Rasmussen cites past polls to put the paltry approval rating in context:

These numbers are even weaker than the numbers recorded following the Supreme Court ruling upholding the president's health care law last year. Just before the court heard arguments on the health care law, 28% gave the justices good or excellent marks. However, disapproval was far lower than it is today.

Data from Rasmussen on the opinion of the Supreme Court over the last four years shows a marked drop in approval. Since 2009, conservative opinion has dropped 16 percent and moderate voters' opinion has dropped 30 percent, though liberal opinion has remained consistent. Even as recently as last week, 30 percent "gave the court good or excellent marks," according to the polling center.

It seems that just about every demographic feels antagonized by the court. Related polls provide insight into specific points of discontent:

Overall, 39% of voters now believe the court is too liberal, while 24% believe it is too conservative. 

[…]Currently, 43% believe the justice system is fair to most Americans, but only 32% believe it is fair to poor Americans. Forty-five percent (45%) feel the system is fair to black and Hispanic Americans. These numbers changed little over the past week.

Recent polling finds that 41% of American Adults believe that the Supreme Court is too hostile towards religions, while 15% believe it is too friendly. Thirty percent (30%) believe the balance is about right. 

The 2013-2014 session of the Supreme Court begins in October. 

Comments

[Fist of Etiquette]

There's something in their recent rulings to piss everyone off. Either they let state agents get away with things or they let our neighbors do something we find objectionable.

If they're not careful, they're going to have a tough time getting re-elected.

[pan fried wylie]

People deserve the justices they elect.

[jesse.in.mb]

Maybe we can replace them with the folks from American Idol...Americans seem to love them!

What could possibly go wrong?

[Hyperion]

It probably wouldn't get much worse.

Do you really think that anyone from American Idol could think up a fucking penaltax?

[mad libertarian guy]

No. But I'd imagine that the outcome-oriented shit they would come up with would be the ultimate FYTW.

[Rights-Minimalist Autocrat]

Just 21% of voters believe that the government today has the consent of the governed.

Bury the lede much?

[Hyperion]

But more than 50% of them are willing to overlook that as long as the free shit train keeps rolling.

[A Serious Man]

They aren't supposed to give two shits about what the voters think.

But while we are on the subject, Elena Kagan she shot a deer while hunting with Antonin Scalia.

[mad libertarian guy]

Good for her.

[A Serious Man]

For all the shit Scalia gets, it is said that he gets along very well on a personal level with the other Justices. One of his best friends is actually Ginsburg.

[Pro Libertate]

Sexual desire knows no political bounds.

[Episiarch]

Funny, that's what your mom said to me last night.

[Hugh Akston]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Trenchant

[Episiarch]

I know you'll always appreciate that, Hugh. It's my way of giving back.

[Hugh Akston]

I thought crabs was your way of giving back.

[jesse.in.mb]

Crabs are for a season oral herpes is forever.

[Episiarch]

One of many, Hugh. I know you wouldn't think so, but I'm very generous. With STDs.

[Hyperion]

Maybe if we out her, the vegans will burn her at the stake.

[Paul.]

Citizenz Unitedz!

[Duke]

Yeah, I know people who are dedicating their careers to fighting that case. How about fighting Marbury v. Madison instead? That's the case that actually did us in.

[mad libertarian guy]

Why even bother? It isn't as if any of us will ever have any say whatsoever as to who is on the court.

And the legal arguments and reasonings for particular opinions don't factor in to how people want the outcome of particular cases to be.

Your average liberal thinks that the court just "gutted" the VRA rather than telling Congress it had to change one section of the law so that it would use voting data that is more current than 50 years old.

[Anonymous Coward]

Rasmussen found that "public approval of the court has fallen to the lowest level ever recorded in more than nine years of polling.

Dear Rasmussen,

Thank you for justifying the Constitution.

Sincerely,

Constitution enthusiasts.

[hawkfan050]

While I echo A Serious Man that they aren't supposed to care, the real problem is not their opinions because it is not surprising the division of opinions (that's why they are called opinions). The real problem is that it is having to be left to the 9 people on the bench to decide these issues because the politicians are all too cowardly to take a real stand. Instead they more often present bills with great sounding names that do nothing to the status quo of whatever the issue is, if they even offer that.

[Hyperion]

Instead they more often always present bills with great sounding names that do nothing to the status quo of whatever the issue is, if they even offer that and jam them full of totally unrelated pork.

FIFY

[Paul.]

If only there was some way to balance the power between the three branches...

[Hyperion]

Congress should have most of the power, probably, but like someone already pointed out, they are a bunch of old crony cowards who are good for nothing but furthering their own careers, rewarding lobbyist, and screwing over tax payers.

Term limits. No career politics. We can't get anywhere until we do that.

Voting once worked for term limits, until a majority of the population got too stupid to really be allowed to vote.

[Pro Libertate]

That's what term limits are, a hedge against stupid. We need a bunch of those, too, not just that one. The hedges we employed haven't worked as well as intended.

[Hyperion]

Agree, we really need to shore up those hedges.

[Paul.]

hat's what term limits are, a hedge against stupid. We need a bunch of those, too, not just that one.

A term limit for every member of Congress, not just the ones we don't like? You go too far, sir!

[Mr. Soul]

the population hasn't gotten "stupider", more of the "stupid" are now voting.

It's not the "low information" part that hurts, it's the "voter" part.

[americanexile]

A lower approval rating for the Court means they're doing something right for once. Pissing off tyrannies of majorities tends to lower your poll numbers.

[Auric Demonocles]

'All time low' seems a bit strong for something with 9 years of polling but 200+ years of existence.

[widget]

Did you know that Home and Garden magazine is taking a poll of new home owners this month? They probably do that every month. The girl unit brought her laptop to the kitchen table to sign up for the sweepstakes you can enter by participating in this month's poll. The mom unit started giving the girl unit information to fill in the polling information. The dad unit tilted his chair back on two legs, looked at the mom unit, and the dinner conversation changed. The mom unit is smart, she almost always encourages the child units to pursue their goals, but not in this case.

[Hugh Akston]

You have much to teach us, An0n-b0t.