In a new article published in The Journal of Politics, Jessica A. Schoenherr, assistant professor of political science, and her co-authors explore how the race and gender of individuals who bring cases before the U.S. Supreme Court can influence public support for its decisions. The study focuses on “counter-stereotypical litigants,” or people whose identities do not align with the expected beneficiaries of a particular legal outcome, and examines whether their presence can shape how the public views the legitimacy of the Court’s rulings.
To test this, the researchers conducted two large-scale survey experiments in which participants read hypothetical news articles about Supreme Court cases on affirmative action and gun rights. In each scenario, the race and gender of the litigant were randomly varied. After reading, participants were asked to rate their support for the Court using a standard “feeling thermometer.” This approach allowed the authors to isolate the effect of litigant identity on public reactions to rights-affirming decisions.
“Understanding the role litigants play in generating support for the Supreme Court is really important because attorneys are increasingly looking for counter-stereotypical litigants to front their cases,” said Schoenherr. “Our findings suggest attorneys can find some success with counter-stereotypical litigants, but they need to be really careful about who they select, because people can respond badly to certain types of appeals.”
Through these experiments, the authors found that litigant identity can significantly affect public opinion, though not always in expected ways. For example, support for overturning affirmative action policies increased when the case was brought by a Black man, but decreased when brought by an Asian American man. In gun rights cases, a White female litigant generated the most widespread support for the Court’s decision to expand Second Amendment protections.
This study not only offers new insights into identity politics and judicial strategy, but also highlights the impactful work of Dr. Schoenherr, who recently joined the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Her research strengthens the department’s expertise in American politics, enhances its focus on judicial behavior, and underscores the importance of academic inquiry in understanding the relationship between courts, the public, and democratic institutions.
Access the full article: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/732956
