You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Shattering the Myth of Legality: The Impact of the Media's Framing of Supreme Court Procedures on Perceptions of Fairness
Vanessa A. Baird and Amy Gangl
Vol. 27, No. 4 (Aug., 2006), pp. 597-614
Published by: International Society of Political Psychology
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3792397
Page Count: 18
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Fairness, Procedural justice, Justice, Terrorism, Perception tests, Political science, Legal proceedings, Criminal justice, Decision making, Political legitimacy
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
The tendency of the media to depict the Supreme Court as inherently apolitical, some scholars argue, is part of the reason that many believe in the "myth of legality" in which the Court is perceived to operate above the ideological skirmishes of everyday politics. Our experimental analyses show that citizens react more negatively to press reports of a politically motivated Court than they do to coverage portraying a Court that strictly follows legal guidelines. Interestingly, our results also suggest that it is not so much the perceived absence of political wrangling among justices but rather it is the presence of legal guidelines driving the outcome that is the source of the perception of fairness.
Political Psychology © 2006 International Society of Political Psychology