separate branches shared responsibilites
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
1/62
Separate Branches, Shared Responsibil ities:
A National Survey of Public Expectations on Solving Justice Issues
Conducted on behalf of the National Center for State Courts
Princeton Survey Research Associates Intl.
For the National Center for State Courts
April 2009
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
2/62
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many knowledgeable individuals contributed to this report directly or indirectly, through the
development of the survey questionnaire, analysis of the results, and production of the report.
All have our gratitude. The ABA Summit organizers, staff from the Council of State
Governments and the Pew Center on the States contributed suggestions that helped shape thequestionnaire, as did Professor Roger Hartley of the University of Arizona. David Rottman and
Jesse Rutledge of the National Center from State Courts (NCSC) provided useful advice in
designing the survey questions and reviewing drafts of the report. Staff from the
Communications Section of the NCSC oversaw publication of this report. This survey was made
possible by funding from the Pew Center on the States, the State Justice Institute, and the
National Center for State Courts.
This survey was commissioned to inform a National Summit sponsored by the American Bar
Association Presidential Commission on Fair and Impartial State Courts in cooperation with the
National Center for State Courts. The Summit on Justice is the Business of Government:The Critical Role of Fair and Impartial State Courts, took place on May 7-9, 2009.
All statements and interpretations contained in the report are those of Princeton Survey
Research Associates International and do not reflect the policy positions of the American Bar
Association, the Pew Center for the States, the State Justice Institute or the NCSC.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
3/62
Table of Contents
THE SURVEYDESIGN AND REPORTING I N BRIEF..................................................................... 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................... 2
DETAI LED FINDI NGS .................................................................................................... 13
I. KNOWLEDGE OF STATE GOVERNMENT AND THE JUDICIAL BRANCH ............................... 14
Does Your State Have Its Own Constitution? ....................................................................14
Can You Name the Three Branches of State Government? ................................................14
Are Your State Supreme Court Judges Elected by the Voters? ...........................................15
Can Your State Supreme Court Declare an Act of the Legislature Unconstitutional? .............16
Summing Up: The Knowledge Index ...............................................................................16
II. CONFIDENCE IN THE THREE BRANCHES OF STATE GOVERNMENT .................................. 17
Majorities Express Confidence in All Three Branches, Courts on Top ..................................17
The Better Informed, More Attentive Give Judicial Branch Higher Ratings ...........................18
Courts Confidence Ratings Dont Follow Party Lines .........................................................18
Governors Popularity Impacts Other Branches, but Opinion of Judiciary Least Affected .......18
III. A TTITUDES TOWARD THE JUDICIAL BRANCH ............................................................. 19Majority Sees Court Decisions as Tied Up in Politics ..........................................................20
Public at Large, Informed Group Differ on Key Attitudes ...................................................21
Summarizing Attitudes Toward the State Courts: Knowledge is Key ...................................23
Public At Large, Informed Group Differ on Balance of Power Among Branches ....................24
IV. THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY AND OTHERBRANCHES .............................. 26
The Public Wants Each State Branch to Play a Big Role in Problem Solving .........................27
Legislators Are Favored Leaders on Issues Facing States ..................................................27
V. THE JUDICIARYBUDGET PROCESS AND PRIORITIES ................................................... 2 9
Tri-Branch Committee the Preferred Group to Make Court Funding Decisions......................29
Preserving the Courts Decision-Making Capacity is the Priority for Budget ..........................31 VI. ENHANCING INTER-BRANCH COOPERATION .............................................................. 32
Strong Public Support for Regular Meetings of the Government Branches ...........................33
Mandated Tri-Branch Meetings Less Appealing to Supporters of Independent Judiciary .......33
Public Endorses Discussion of All Aspects of the Judicial System ........................................34
Public Prefers a Rotating Chairperson to One Branch Controlling Meetings..........................35
On-the-Job Observation of Officials From Other Branches .................................................36
VI I. PUBLIC EXPERIENCE W ITH THE STATE COURTS ......................................................... 3 6
Contact With the Courts .................................................................................................37
Experience With the Courts Has Minimal Impact on Opinions of the Judiciary .....................38
TECHNICAL APPENDIX ................................................................................................. 39
SURVEYMETHODOLOGY.................................................................................................... 40Summary ......................................................................................................................40
Design and Data Collection Procedures............................................................................40
Weighting and Analysis ..................................................................................................41
Effects of Sample Design on Statistical Inference .............................................................43
Response Rate ..............................................................................................................44
INTER-BRANCH RELATIONS SURVEYTOPLINE RESULTS ........................................................ 45
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
4/62
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
5/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
1
THE SURVEYDESIGN AND REPORTING IN BRIEF
This report presents the results of a new National Center for State Courts (NCSC) study about
public perceptions of how the three branches of state government should work together in
forging and supporting policies affecting the administration of justice. A representative national
telephone survey of 1,200 adults age 18 and older was conducted from February 17 to March 8,
2009 by Princeton Survey Research Associates International (PSRAI). For results based on the
total sample, the overall margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points.
The report begins with an executive summary that highlights the
key findings concerning the publics opinions about how the
branches of government should work together and the effects of
such cooperation on the state courts in particular. The subsequent
sections present the detailed findings of the survey according to
seven key topics. Each section begins with an overview of the
results for the topic area and then provides specific survey findings
for related questions, including any relevant comparisons across the
key socio-demographic subgroups considered for this survey
analysis. In addition to socio-demographic characteristics,
respondents are grouped and then compared by their knowledge
about their state government and courts, confidence in the state
courts, the way in which state supreme court judges are selected in their state, their attitudes
toward their state courts and the way the courts make decisions, and how closely they follow
news about their state.
Other important notes on the findings in this report include:
Each substantive question in the survey was analyzed by the key backgroundcharacteristics, but only those differences that illuminate the overall finding or relate to
the publics attitudes about sentencing are discussed.
In addition, differences between groups are included only if they are statisticallysignificant at the 95% confidence level. Should any difference not be statistically
significant at this level, but is reported for other reasons, that will be noted.1
Significance testing ensures that differences reported are unlikely to be the result of
chance alone.
A more detailed description of the survey methodology, including an explanation of significance,
is included in the Appendix of this report.
1 Similarly, differences related to highly correlated background characteristics, such as age, education andrace/ethnicity, are reported only if they remain statistically significant independent of one another. If that is notthe case, but these differences are included, that will be noted.
KKEEYY BBAACCKKGGRROOUUNNDDCCHHAARRAACCTTEERRIISSTTIICCSS CCOONNSSIIDDEERREEDD
IINN SSUURRVVEEYY AANNAALLYYSSIISS
SexAge
Education
Income
Race/Ethnicity
Political Party ID
Knowledge of State Govt./Courts
Confidence in the Court
State Supreme Court JudgeSelection Method
Attitudes Toward State Courts
Attention to State News
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
6/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The financial crisis and the recession have put great pressure on state governments in this
country. Declining tax revenue has put pressure on the states to cut services, raise taxes, and
find other sources of money to make up the difference. At the same time, the problems that
need the attention of state government have not gone away. In fact, some have become even
more urgent given the economic downturn. Can the three branches of state government find
new ways to work together to meet the challenges of these difficult times? The new NCSC
Inter-Branch Relations Survey on state government, conducted by Princeton Survey Research
Associates International, examined public opinion toward state government to better
understand Americans priorities, attitudes toward the three branches generally and the judicial
branch specifically, and what factors most shape peoples views.
Interviewing for this national poll of 1,200 U.S. adults was conducted in February and March of
2009, as the new President and Congress were working toward a stimulus package to provide
relief to states and get the economy moving again. The results of the new survey show a
widespread public desire for cooperation among the branches at the state level. The following
are among the major findings of the new NCSC poll:
Substantial public support is found for more cooperation among the branches in mattersrelated to the justice system. Nine in 10 Americans think it is important for the heads of
the three branches to meet regularly to discuss such issues. A majority of Americans
also see value in on-the-job observation of officials from other branches as a way to
better understand and appreciate the role of each branch.
The public views the judiciary differently than the other branches. People are morelikely to express confidence in the state courts than the executive and legislativebranches. Opinions of the courts are less tied to partisan identification or other politicalinfluences. In addition, those best informed about their state government have themost positive views of the courts, regardless of party preference.
There is widespread public support for the principle of separation of power to give statesupreme courts the final say in deciding controversial issues. Recognizing the value of
an independent judiciary, not political party affiliation, is the bigger factor impacting
peoples attitudes about the way the courts make decisions.
The public wants all three branches to play a major role in helping solve key problemsfacing the states, like prison overcrowding and caring for neglected and abused children.
But people tend not to think the judiciary should take the lead role in efforts to solve
these problems. People are instead more likely to choose the legislative branch to play
such an overtly political role.
The American public is opposed to budget cuts that would affect the core functions ofthe judiciary. Majorities reject suspending jury trials and reducing the number of judges
through attrition as cost-cutting measures. In addition, it supports the proposals of
increasing court fees and reducing court hours only if there are no other options.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
7/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
3
Most Americans Lack Basic Know ledge About State Government
To better understand public opinion toward state government and relations between the
branches, it is important to recognize that many Americans have a very limited knowledge base.
In fact, the NCSC Survey finds that most people lack the basic knowledge about their state
government and how it operates that would have been necessary to pass high school civics,
back when such classes were still widely part of the curriculum.
To measure knowledge, the NCSC Survey included six factual questions about the state
government generally and the judicial branch specifically. Only about a third (31%) of the adult
U.S. population demonstrates a reasonably high level of knowledge about state government by
answering at least four of these six questions correctly. This is the segment of the population
who are more likely to civically active and to make an effort to educate others and try to
influence their opinions. Demographically, the high knowledge group is most distinguished by
education status. A majority of college graduates (58%) score high on knowledge, compared
with fewer than two in 10 people with a high school
education (17%).
As will be demonstrated in the full report, this high
knowledge group differs from the broader public in its
attitudes toward the judicial branch. These better-
informed citizens tend to have more confidence in
their state courts, are more likely to see judges
decisions as fair, and more highly value an
independent judiciary.
Legislature Tops Other Branches in Public Aw areness
The NCSC Survey asked people to name the branches of their state government in an open-
ended format, i.e., without suggesting any answers. Those who named a branch were probed
for a full response to see if they were, in fact, aware of all three branches. Most people were
not up to the challenge. Only about one in five (21%) randomly sampled U.S. adults correctly
named all three branches, while more than four in 10 (44%) drew a blank and failed to
correctly identify any of the three branches.
One branch of state government proves to be more salient to the public than the other two
branches the legislature. Forty-five percent were able to name the legislative branch or statelegislature. Although the governor is generally regarded as the best known individual in state
government, the governors office did not score any higher than the judiciary in unaided public
awareness. A third (33%) mentioned the executive branch or the governor and a third (34%)
named the judicial branch or the state courts a statistical tie for second place.
TABLE A: KNOWLEDGE OF STATE GOVERNMENTBY EDUCATION
Knowledge Index Score*
High(4+ correct)
Medium(2-3)
Low(0,1)
TOTAL 31% 39% 31%
Education
College graduate 58 28 15
Some college 37 39 25
H.S. graduate 17 47 36
Less than H.S. 6 39 55
* Scores based on six items measuring awareness of stategovernment and the courts.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
8/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
4
Less than Half Aw are of Judiciarys Authority to Check Legislature
Most Americans know their state has its own constitution, but people are less likely to be
familiar with the power that the constitution gives the state judiciary to check the power of the
legislature. Over half (53%) the public is aware of their state constitution, but only four in 10
(41%) know that the state constitution invests the state supreme court with the authority to
strike down acts of the legislature as unconstitutional.
Higher Awareness of Judicial Selection in States W here Judges Run for Office
Overall, about half (51%) of U.S. adults show themselves to be aware of the way their state
selects supreme court judges, i.e., whether they are elected or appointed. Awareness is higher,
however in states where judges are required to run for office. In states that elect judges, a
clear majority (55%) know the situation, compared with only about a third (34%) of those in
states without any elections for the state supreme court. Unlike all the other knowledge
questions, no significant difference is found by education in the percent knowing the right
answer. Fifty-three percent of college graduates answer correctly, as do 48% of those with ahigh school education or less.
All Three Branches Receive Vote of Confidence, But Courts Bes t Regarded
Majorities of Americans say they have a lot
or some confidence in all three branches of
their state government, but the judicial
branch stands out as the branch that the
public holds in highest regard.
Roughly three-quarters (74%) of the publicgives the courts a positive confidence rating.
Scores for the other two branches are not as
high. About two thirds have at least some
confidence in the office of governor (65%)
and the state legislature (66%).
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
9/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
5
Ratings of Judicial Branch Highest Among Best Informed
Those who scored high on the knowledge
index are significantly more likely than less
informed citizens to express confidence in
their state courts. By a margin of 83% to
65%, the high knowledge group is more likely
than the low knowledge group to say they
have at least some confidence in the judicial
branch. These confidence rating patterns are
not evident in the confidence ratings for the
executive and legislative branches.
Courts Ratings Less Affected by the P olit ical Environment
Political party identification does not significantly impact confidence ratings for the judicial
branch. Statistically similar numbers of Republicans (77%), Democrats (74%), andIndependents (73%) say they have a lot or some confidence in the courts. In contrast, the
state legislature gets higher ratings from Democrats than Republicans and Independents (73%
vs. 64% and 62%), while the governors office gets higher ratings from Independents and
Republicans than Democrats (68% and 67% vs. 61%).
Confidence ratings for all three branches tend to increase when an incumbent governor is
popular and decrease when people are unhappy with the governors job performance. Ratings
for the judicial branch, however, are not as tied to the ups and downs of the popularity of state
governments chief executive as the other branches are. Among those who approve of their
governors job performance, nearly nine in 10 are confident in the executive branch (87%), andabout eight in 10 are confident in the courts (81%) and the legislature (78%). But among
those who disapprove of the governor, only the courts get a positive confidence rating from a
clear majority (67% vs. 50% legislature, and 30% governors office).
State Supreme Courts Role as Final Arbiter Widely Supported
The NCSC Survey finds gaps in Americans
knowledge about what the courts do and fairly
widespread criticism of the judiciary for not
always being able to stay above politics.
Nonetheless, when it comes to the question of
whether the state supreme court should
maintain its role as the final arbiter on key
controversial issues, the public supports the
constitution. Overall, more than two-thirds
(71%) of Americans say their state supreme
court should keep its ability to decide controversial issues, while only about a quarter (23%)
TABLE B: STATE GOVERNMENT CONFIDENCE RATINGSBY KNOWLEDGE
Percent With A lot or SomeConfidence in
Courts Legislature Governor
TOTAL 74% 71% 65%
Knowledge Index
High 83 65 62
Medium 74 67 67
Low 65 67 64
Percentages should be read across, by row.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
10/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
6
feel its power should be restricted and it should not decide as many controversial issues as it
does now.
Yielding to Courts Authority on Controversial Issues a Basic American Value
Giving the judiciary the power to make these kinds of decisions would seem to be a basic,
shared value in American society. Neither knowledge level nor political partisanship has much
effect on public support for upholding the authority of the judicial branch. A large majority
(77%) of the high knowledge group say their state supreme court should retain the power it
has now, but so do nearly as many (71%) of those in the low knowledge group. Despite the
criticisms of activist judges often voiced by conservative politicians and groups, only 27% of
Republicans say they would like to put limits on their state supreme courts power to decide
controversial issues. That is only slightly higher than the percentage of Democrats (20%) with
similar views.
Many Criticize Courts for Failing to P ut Polit ics Aside
While people tend to look to the judicial branch as the best option for keeping certain decisions
out of the political arena, many feel politics intrudes in court decisions more than it should. A
clear majority (59%) of Americans say the decisions of their state courts are too often mixed
up in politics, while a third (34%) credit their state courts with generally keeping politics out of
their decisions. The tendency to see politics having undo influence on the courts does not vary
significantly by knowledge level about state government or by party identification. This is yet
another survey finding at odds with the notion that Republicans are more critical of the courts
for legislating from the bench.
Independent Judiciary Most Appreciated by Best InformedOn several other key attitudes that underlie opinion about the credibility of the state courts, i.e.,
peoples attitudes about the way the courts make decisions, the most knowledgeable third of
the public differ significantly from those less informed about state government. Specifically:
A 55% majority of the high knowledge group believes that their state courts can usuallybe trusted to make decisions that are right for the state as a whole. That figure drops
to 42% for the medium knowledge group and 30% in the low knowledge group.
A 58% majority of those in the high knowledge group value judicial independence,saying it is better for the courts to be independent and less influenced by public opinion,
compared with 42% in the medium and 37% in the low knowledge groups.
There is also a relationship between how much confidence people have in their state courts and
whether or not they personally value the concept of an independent judiciary. A solid majority
(60%) of those with a lot of confidence in their state courts say it is important for judges to be
independent, compared with less than half (46%) of those with some confidence in their courts
and only about a third (31%) of those with not much or no confidence. This helps explain the
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
11/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
7
differences in court credibility attitudes by knowledge its not just a matter of being attentive
to what the courts are doing, but also understanding their proper role.
Courts Credibil ity Index Scores Show Impact of Know ledge, Party ID
To summarize attitudes toward the state courts, the survey respondents were scored on a
Courts Credibility Index comprised of four measures of attitudes toward the courts previously
noted in this executive summary: 1) support for
the authority of the state supreme court to
decide controversial issues; 2) the perceived
impact of politics on court decisions; 3)
perceived consideration for the general welfare;
and 4) the value of an independent judiciary.
Respondents were classified into three groups
based on their index score. Those in the high
category (32% overall) mostly answered three
or four questions positively, those in the low
category (31%) mostly answered three of the
four questions negatively. The medium group
(37%) had a mix of positive and negative
answers. Table C provides a break down of
index scores by key subgroups.
Analysis of the Courts Credibility Index scores shows how different the best informed Americans
are from the rest of the adult population. Almost half (45%) of the high knowledge group
scored high on the credibility index, and less than a quarter (22%) scored low. In contrast, themedium and low knowledge groups include more people classified as low in their courts
credibility attitudes than are classified as high.
Best Informed Have Different Views on Balance of Power
About half (49%) of the public does
not want to see the balance of
power between the judiciary and
the other branches change.
However, one in four (24%) want
elected officials in the executiveand legislative branch to have more
control over the judiciary than they
do now and one in five (19%) want
these other branches to have less
control than they do now.
TABLE C: COURTS CREDIBILITY ATTITUDESBY SUBGROUPS
Courts Credibility Index Score*
High(most pos.) Medium
Low(most neg.)
TOTAL 32% 37% 31%
Knowledge Index
High 45 33 22
Medium 29 35 36
Low 23 43 34
Confidence in Courts
A lot 49 32 19Some 33 36 31
Not much/None 15 37 48
Party ID
Republican 33 33 34
Democrat 31 37 32
Independent 35 38 27
* Scores based on four items measuring attitudes toward the statecourts.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
12/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
8
Again, those in the high knowledge group have opinions that diverge somewhat from the views
of the public at large. Like the broader public, the best informed Americans are most likely to
oppose a shift in the balance of power (50%), but those who favor change are more likely to
say the two other branches should have lesspower over the courts, not more (27% vs. 14%).
Public W ants All Three Branches Involved in Addressing Key ProblemsThe public believes that each branch of state government has an important role to play in
efforts to address key problems facing their state. The NCSC Survey included a description of
two specific problem areas affecting the criminal justice system: 1) prison overcrowding (in the
news at the time the survey was conducted because of a ruling in California forcing the state to
reduce the number of incarcerated individuals); and 2) the issue of caring for neglected and
abused children who are removed from their parents homes for their own protection. After
hearing these problems described, solid majorities of adults surveyed say each branch should
play a big role as opposed to a small role or no role at all in efforts to find solutions.
For both problem areas, almost seven in 10
Americans want legislators to have a big role,
and six in 10 want their states governor to be
a major player. Once again, the courts stand
out as different from the other two branches.
People are more inclined to think judges
should play a big role in helping solve
problems related to the care of neglected and
abused children than endorse a similar role
for judges in addressing prison overcrowding (67% vs. 59%). In fact, those who say they havebeen exposed to a lot of news about the problem of caring for abused children are more likely
to want judges to play a big role than they are legislators or the governor.
TABLE D: ROLE OF THE THREE BRANCHES IN SOLVINGSTATE JUDICIAL PROBLEMS
Percent Who Say BranchShould Play a Big Role
Legislators Judges Governor
In efforts to address
Prison overcrowding 69% 59% 64%
Caring for neglectedand abused children
69% 67% 62%
Percentages should be read across, by row.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
13/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
9
No Consensus on W ho Should Lead, But Legislators Picked More Often
While there is consensus that all three branches
should be involved in working toward solutions to
key problems, the public is divided on which
branch should take the lead rolein efforts to find
solutions. For both problem areas, however, morepeople choose the legislature to lead than either
of the other two branches. For caring for abused
and neglected children, the judiciary ranks second
as the choice to lead and the governor ranks third.
But the ranking of those two branches is reversed
for prison overcrowding.
Four in 10 adults (39%) say they would like their
state legislators to lead efforts to address prison
overcrowding in their state. The governor rankssecond (27%) followed by judges (22%). As
many as one in 10 offers no opinion on which
branch should take the lead. The judiciarys position as least preferred to lead on this issue is
consistent with the lower percent who think judges should play a major role in addressing the
problem. As interpreters of the law, it is understandable that judges would not be the first
choice of many to play the most visible role in efforts to solve this problem.
As is seen for prison overcrowding, the leadership role in efforts to solve problems related to
the care of neglected and abuse children is most often assigned to the legislature. In this case,
however, judges rank second (27%) and the governor ranks third (24%). This is an issuewhere the public seems a bit more comfortable with judges having a prominent role.
Leadership Preferences Not Tied To Demographics, Know ledge or Confidence
Public preferences for which branch should take the lead on key issues does not vary
significantly by education level, knowledge about state government, party identification, or
approval of the governor. It is noteworthy that those who have a high level of confidence in
the state courts are not significantly more likely to think judges should lead than those who
have less confidence in their state judiciary. Those who have had direct personal experience
with their state courts are also no more likely than those without such experience to want to
see judges in a leadership role. The legislatures standing as the most popular leadership
preference most likely has to do with its traditional role as a political institution that unlike the
governor includes representation from both parties to better represent all points of view.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
14/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
10
Shared Decision-Making P reference Extends to Court Budgets
If it were up to the American public, state court
budgets would not be determined by the
legislature or any single branch, but decided by a
non-partisan committee with representation from
all three branches of government. Overall, about
half (51%) say they prefer such collaboration in
reaching decisions about budgets for the judiciary
while about four in 10 (41%) do not like the
approach of a consensus decision and would
rather give the final say to one branch.
When people are asked to choose one branch to make the final decision on funding the courts,
no single branch is chosen by a majority, but once again the legislature is named more often
than the other branches. Four in 10 (42%) say they would like their state legislature to have
the final say on the state court budget, while three in 10 (30%) want the governor to make the
call, and two in 10 (21%) would rather see the chief justice of the state supreme court as the
final decision-maker.
Public Wary of Budget Cuts that Limit Adjudication
State courts across the country are facing tough budget decisions that require creativity to find
ways to cut costs. The public finds some of the measures being considered to be tolerable, but
is reluctant to back any belt-tightening that would limit the decision-making capacity of their
state courts. Two-thirds (66%) of Americans categorically reject the proposal of suspending
jury trials as a way to reduce costs. Over half (53%) also reject out of hand the idea ofreducing the number of judges through attrition.
Two other proposed ways to cut costs are somewhat more palatable to the public, although in
both cases many people would be supportive only if there is no other option. Close to two-
thirds (64%) would at least consider periodically closing courthouses to save money and over
half (55%) would support a hike in court fees for those filing lawsuits to help balance the courts
budget. Much of this support, however, is contingent on exploring all other options before
taking such measures.
TABLE E: PRIORITIES FOR COURT BUDGET CUTS
Notacceptable
Only if noother option
Generallyacceptable
Stop holding jury trials 66% 19% 10%
Not replacing judges who retire or die 53% 27% 16%
Raising the fees charged to peoplewho want to take a case to court 40% 28% 27%
Closing the courthouse for one ormore days each week 33% 33% 31%
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
15/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
11
Widespread Public Support for R egular Tri-Branch M eetings
Substantial public support is found for increasing cooperation among the branches of state
government in matters related to the justice system. Nine in 10 Americans say they think it is
very (65%) or somewhat (25%) important that the heads of the three branches of state
government hold regular meetings to discuss issues related to the effectiveness and fairness of
the justice system.
In fact, many people feel it is so important to
convene these meetings that they should be
mandated into law. About three-quarters (74%)
of Americans say state law should require the
heads of the three branches of government to hold
joint meetings on a regular basis. Support for
these regular meetings is seen among those more
and less knowledgeable about state government,
and across party lines.
Reinforcing other survey findings that show broad public support for cooperation among the
branches, a majority (57%) of Americans would like to see the heads of the three branches
take turns chairing these hypothetical tri-branch meetings. The rotating chairperson preference
scores much higher than the second most popular response to this question about one in five
(18%) would like to see the governor in the role of chairperson.
Public Favors W ide-Ranging Agenda for Meetings of B ranch Leaders
Americans feel that meetings of the branches should cover a range of issues. Large majoritiessay it would be appropriate to discuss court funding needs (84%), sentencing policy (75%),
drafting laws that do not violate the constitution (74%), the costs of filing a court case (70%),
and even controversial court decisions (67%).
Public Sees Benefits From On-The-Job Observation
The public looks favorably on the idea of initiating state programs that would allow legislators
and trial judges to spend a day observing one another on the job. Nearly six in 10 (58%)
people surveyed say they think this type of program is a good use of judges and legislators
time, and presumably helps them understand the responsibilities of the other branch and
enhances cooperation between the branches. Just over a third (35%) of the public disagrees,saying they think this type of program is not likely to accomplish much.
Over Half of Americans Report Contact with their State Courts
The NCSC Survey asked respondents about their experiences with their state courts, in order to
test whether those with such experiences differed in their attitudes toward state government
generally and the judicial branch in particular.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
16/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
12
A majority of U.S. adults (56%) reports having some form of direct experience, contact or
involvement with a state court case. Forty-three percent of Americans report they have not
ever had any contact with their state courts. The most common experience with the state
courts involves being called for jury duty 22% of those surveyed report having been called
but not selected, while 15% report being selected as a juror or an alternate juror in a state
case. Very few people report experiencing the courtroom as a defendant (7%), a person filing
a lawsuit (4%), a person being sued (2%) or in some other capacity (2%).
Opinions of Judiciary Not Affected by Court Experience
Personal experience with the judicial system has minimal influence on peoples opinions of state
courts and judges. For the most part, adults who have been involved with the courts and those
who have not share similar views about all aspects of the judiciary. The one exception is
attitudes toward cost-cutting measures that might affect the courts decision-making capacity.
Those with direct personal experience seem to have a more realistic perspective and more
adamantly such oppose measures. Specifically, 76% of adults with court experience say it is
not acceptable to suspend jury trials as a means of cutting the court budget, compared with
55% of adults who have not had contact. Likewise, those with court experience are more likely
than the inexperienced to say it is unacceptable to try to cut costs by not replacing judges who
retire or die (56% vs. 49%).
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
17/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
13
DETAILED FINDINGS
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
18/62
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
19/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
15
And more than two in five (44%) randomly sampled adult Americans drew a blank and couldnt
name any. The survey finds the legislative branch of state government to have a higher profile
with the general public than either the executive or judicial branches.
Forty-five percent were able to name the legislative branch or state legislature in this three-part
open-ended question. Although thegovernor is generally regarded as
the best known individual in state
government, the governors office
did not score any higher in unaided
awareness than the judiciary. A
third (33%) mentioned the
executive branch or the governor;
a third (34%) named the judicial
branch or the state courts.
College graduates were more likely
to name all three branches, but like the public as a whole were more likely to cite the legislative
(69%) than the executive (57%) or judicial (56%) branches.
Are Your State Supreme Court Judges Elected by the Voters?
Only about half (51%) of all U.S. adults surveyed answered correctly when asked about the
method used to select their state supreme court judges. But there is evidence of greater
awareness in states where judges
are required to run for office.
In states that elect, a clear majority
(55%) demonstrated knowledge of
how things are done in their state.
In contrast, only about a third (34%)
of those living in states without any
elections for the state supreme court
judges know how things are done.
In fact, nearly a third (30%) are
under the mistaken impression thatthese judges are elected.
Unlike all the other knowledge questions, this is a case where better educated respondents
were not significantly more likely than the less well educated to know the right answer. Fifty-
three percent of college graduates answered correctly, only slightly higher than the 48% of
those with a high school education or less.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
20/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
16
Can Your St ate Supreme Court Declare an Act of the LegislatureUnconstitutional?
In the last and what proved to be the most difficult closed-ended knowledge question, less than
half (41%) of respondents showed awareness that acts of the legislature can be declared
unconstitutional by their state supreme court. Thirteen percent got this question wrong, saying
the states highest court has no such authority, and 44% said they didnt know. Roughly half
(52%) of college graduates surveyed recognized this role for their state judiciary, compared
with less than four in 10 of those with a high school education or less.
Summ ing Up: The Know ledge Index
When respondents are scored on the basis of their performance on this six question quiz the
results show lots of room for improvement. Most Americans fail to demonstrate the kind of
basic knowledge about their state government that would have been required to pass a high
school civics class, back when such classes were still widely taught in public schools. Only
about a third (31%) are classified as high on the Knowledge Index on the basis of correctlyanswering at least four of the six questions. An equal number (31%) are classified as low on
the Knowledge Index, with only one correct answer or none correct. The largest segment of
the public (39%) is in the middle, with two or three correct answers.
As shown in Table 1, when scores to the Knowledge Index are broken down by subgroups
some clear patterns are seen.
Men are more likely to score high than women(36% vs. 26%); while women are more likely
than men to score low (35% vs. 25%). This
gender pattern is consistent with national
survey evidence that men pay more attention
to government and politics than women do.
There are very large differences bysocioeconomic status. While nearly six in 10
(58%) college graduates fall into the high
knowledge category, this compared with fewer
than one in 10 people with a high school
education or less. By race, 37% of whites
score high, compared with just 19% of African-
Americans and 14% of Hispanics.
Republicans, who vote at higher rates thanDemocrats and tend to pay more attention to
political news, score significantly higher in
knowledge. Forty percent of Republicans are
classified as high in their knowledge of state
government, compared with 26% of Democrats and 31% of Independents.
TABLE 1: KNOWLEDGE OF STATE GOVERNMENTBY SUBGROUPS
Knowledge Index Score*
High(4+ correct)
Medium(2-3)
Low(0,1)
TOTAL 31% 39% 31%
Sex
Male 36 39 25
Female 26 38 35
Race/Ethnicity
White 37 37 26
Black 19 42 39
Hispanic 14 50 36
Education
College graduate 58 28 15
Some college 37 39 25
H.S. graduate 17 47 36Less than H.S. 6 39 55
Party ID
Republican 40 37 22
Democrat 26 40 34
Independent 31 41 27
* Scores based on six items measuring awareness of stategovernment and the courts.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
21/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
17
II. CONFIDENCE IN THE THREE BRANCHES OF STATE GOVERNMENT
Section Overview
Most Americans express at least a moderate level of confidence in the three branches of their
state government but relatively few express high confidence. The judicial branch stands out as
the branch that receives the highest confidence ratings overall and the one branch that gets
significantly higher confidence ratings from the best informed citizens those able to
demonstrate a high level of knowledge about state government and the courts.
Majorit ies Express Confidence in All Three Branches, Courts on Top
The NCSC Survey asked people how much confidence they have in different state and local
government institutions to do their job. The state courts come out on top, in terms of total
confidence with roughly three-
quarters (74%) saying they have a
lot or some confidence in them.
That puts the state courts slightly
above local government, which
receives a slightly lower total
confidence rating (71%). The
number of people who say they
have a lot of confidence in the
courts, however, is slightly less
than is seen for local government
(22% vs. 25%). Higher ratings for
local government would beexpected. As a general rule, people
give more positive ratings to institutions that are close to home, e.g., people rate their local
public schools higher than the schools nationwide.
When the total confidence rating is considered combining the percent who feel a lot or some
confidence the executive branch and the legislative branch score about the same. About two-
thirds have at least some confidence in the office of governor (65%) and the state legislature
(66%). The public is more likely to express high confidence in the governors office than it is
the legislature (22% vs. 15%).
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
22/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
18
The Better Informed, More Attentive Give Judicial Branch Higher Ratings
Confidence rating patterns are different
for the judicial branch than they are for
the executive and legislative branches.
In particular, the high knowledge and
low knowledge groups are about
equally likely to express confidence in
these two branches, while important
differences by knowledge are evident
in confidence ratings for the courts.
Citizens who are better informed about
state government and more attentive
to news about their state express
higher confidence in the courts than
those who are less informed and less
engaged. By a significant margin
(83% vs. 65%), those scoring high on
the knowledge index are more likely to
have confidence in their state courts than those with low index scores. Also by a significant
margin (77% vs. 61%) those who follow state news very or somewhat closely are more likely
than those less attentive to state news to have confidence in the courts.
Courts Confidence Ratings Dont Follow Party Lines
Confidence ratings for the courts do not vary much by political party identification. Roughlythree-quarters of Republicans (77%), Democrats (74%), and Independents (73%) have a lot or
some confidence in the courts. In contrast, the state legislature gets higher ratings from
Democrats than Republicans and Independents (73% vs. 64% and 62%), while the governors
office gets higher ratings from Independents and Republicans than Democrats (68% and 67%
vs. 61%).
Governors Popularity Im pacts Other Branches, but Opinion of Judiciary LeastAffected
The governor is generally the best-known political figure in the state. When a governor is
popular, ratings for all three branches of state government tend to go up. When a governor isunpopular, the ratings slip (see Table 2). However, the impact appears to be lowest for the
courts. Among those who approve of their governors job performance, nearly nine in 10 say
they are confident in the executive branch (87%) and eight in 10 are confident in the courts
(81%) and legislature (78%). But among those who disapprove of the governor, only the
courts get a positive confidence rating from a clear majority (67% vs. 50% legislature, and
30% governors office).
TABLE 2: STATE GOVERNMENT CONFIDENCE RATINGS BY SUBGROUPS(PERCENT WITH A LOT OR SOME CONFIDENCE IN EACH BRANCH)
Courts Legislature Governor
TOTAL 74% 71% 65%
Knowledge IndexHigh 83 65 62
Medium 74 67 67
Low 65 67 64
Follow News About State
Very closely 77 66 61
Somewhat closely 77 70 68
Not closely 61 60 63
Party ID
Republican 77 64 67
Democrat 74 73 61
Independent 73 62 68
Governors Job Performance
Approve 81 78 87
Disapprove 67 50 30
Direct Experience with Courts
Jury duty/other experience 74 65 62
No direct experience 74 68 68
Percentages should be read across, by rows.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
23/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
19
Direct experience with the courts themselves, either through jury duty or some other way, does
not seem to have much impact on confidence in the courts or the other branches. In fact, the
proportion of those with court experience who say they are confident in their state courts
(74%) is identical to the proportion who have no such experience (74%).
III. ATTITUDES TOWARD THE JUDICIAL BRANCH
Section Overview
The American public as a whole have opinions of their state courts that seem at odds with the
generally positive confidence ratings they give to the judicial branch. Most people think that
politics plays too big a role in their state courts decisions. Public attitudes toward the state
judiciary also seem contradictory. In spite of their concerns that court decisions are too often
colored by politics, less than half of Americans say they value a state supreme court that is
independent and not too influenced by what others think.
These attitudes are explained, at least in part, by the broader publics limited knowledge of
government in general and the courts in particular. When the opinions of the most
knowledgeable third of the adult population are isolated, the better informed show themselves
to be suspicious about the role of politics but much more supportive of an independent court
that will not simply follow public opinion. While information level matters, partisan orientation
does not appear to be a significant factor in peoples impressions about their state courts ability
to stay above politics and the value of an independent judiciary. The views of Republicans and
Democrats are statistically indistinguishable from one another on these issues. Knowledge, not
ideology, drives opinion.
On one issue, a large majority of the pubic is supportive of their state courts, regardless of their
information level. Few people would like to see the power of their states highest court limited.
Seven in 10 (71%) say their state supreme court should continue to be the final arbiter on
controversial issues facing the state. Giving the judiciary the power to make these kinds of
decisions, rather than the other branches that are often more subject to political influence,
would seem to be a basic, shared value in American society. Neither knowledge level nor
political partisanship has much effect on public support for upholding the authority of the
judicial branch.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
24/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
20
Majority Sees Court Decisions as Tied Up in Polit ics
When asked if they think the decisions of their
state courts are too often mixed up in politics
or if the courts generally put politics aside a
clear majority (59%) of Americans say politics
has inordinate influence, while a third (34%)
credit their state courts with generally keeping
politics out of their decisions.
Looking at response to this question by
subgroups, the high knowledge group is about as
likely as the low knowledge group to be critical of
the courts on political influence (55% vs. 57%).
Those in the middle on the knowledge index are
higher than those above and below (64%).
Those who say they follow state news are more
likely than those who tune it out to think politics
is too mixed up in court decisions.
The impression that politics has too much
influence on the courts may well reflect a
broader concern about the role politics plays in state government, or government in general.
Even among those who give the state judiciary the highest confidence rating (a lot), nearly half
say politics is too big an influence.
No Differences by Party in Perceived Political Influence, Judge Selection a Factor
The perception that politics gets mixed up in state court decisions more than it should is not
associated with a particular partisan identification. Republicans are no more likely than
Democrats and Independents to criticize their state court decisions as too political. This finding
is somewhat surprising since in recent years Republicans and conservatives have more often
charged the courts with being politically motivated in their decisions usually with respect to
rulings on social issues like same sex marriage and abortion.
Differences are found, however, by whether or not the voters elect their state supreme court
judges. Ironically, when judges have to run for elective office, people are more likely to thinktheir decisions are above politics. Fifty-seven percent of those living in states that elect judges
see court decisions too mixed up in politics versus 69% of those in states where judges never
have to face the voters. And opinions of those in elective states are relatively uniform similar
numbers of those living in partisan, non-partisan and retention states report that court decisions
are too mixed up politics. A likely explanation for this pattern is that concern with politics and
appointed judges stems from the direct influence politicians have in those states on deciding
who should be a judge and who should retain their judgeship.
TABLE 3: ROLE OF POLITICS IN COURT DECISIONSBY SUBGROUPS
View of State Court Decisions
Too OftenMixed Up
In Politics
PoliticsGenerally
Put AsideTOTAL 59% 34%
Knowledge Index
High 55 39
Medium 64 31
Low 57 34
Follow News About State
Very closely 63 33
Somewhat closely 59 33
Not closely 51 41
Confidence in Courts
A lot 47 47
Some 63 32
Not much/None 65 28
State Supreme Court
Judges elected 57 36
Judges not elected 69 26
Party ID
Republican 59 35
Democrat 61 34
Independent 57 34
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
25/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
21
Public at Large, Informed Group D iffer on K ey Attitudes
Overall, less than half (42%) of the public believes that their state courts can usually be trusted
to make decisions that are right for the state as a whole. This is a case where attitudes differ
by information level. Among those with high scores on the knowledge index, 55% say their
courts usually consider the general welfare in making decisions, compared with 41% in the
medium knowledge category and 30% in the low knowledge category.
Another way the public as a whole differs from the better informed is in their tendency to value
an independent judiciary that is more resistant to the political environment. Forty-five percent
of the public at large say its better for their state supreme court justices to be independent,
while about half (51%) take the view that top judges should be lessindependent and pay more
attention to what people think.
When results are broken down by the knowledge
index, sharp differences are observed. More than
half (58%) of those in the high knowledge group
value judiciary independence, compared with
42% in the medium and 37% in the low
knowledge groups. Further analysis also shows
that those who express a high level of confidence
in their state courts (a lot) are significantly more
likely than those with lower levels of confidence
to feel its important for top judges to be
Independent.
Support for an independent judiciary does not
vary significantly by partisan affiliation. Similar
numbers of Republicans (48%), Democrats
(45%), and Independents (46%) want their top judges to be independent. When party ID and
knowledge of state government are considered together, analysis shows that those in the high
knowledge category regardless of party give majority support for judicial independence,
while a majority of those less knowledgeable do not.
TABLE 4: VALUE OF AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARYBY SUBGROUPS
Top Judges and Public OpinionImportant
to beIndependent
Should Pay MoreAttention to What
People Think
TOTAL 45% 51%
Knowledge Index
High 58 38
Medium 42 54
Low 37 61
Confidence in Courts
A lot 60 37
Some 46 51
Not much/None 31 65
Party ID
Republican 48 49Democrat 45 53
Independent 46 50
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
26/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
22
7 in 10 Americans Back State Supreme Courts Authority to Decide Controversial Issues
Despite the general publics often critical
attitudes of the state courts, a high level
of support is found for maintaining the
role of the state supreme court in
deciding controversial issues. Overall,
seven in 10 (71%) Americans want their
states top court to keep its power, while
only a quarter (23%) feel its power
should be restricted and it should not
decide as many controversial issues as it
does now.
On this question, differences by knowledge of state government are not significant 77% of
the high knowledge group feel their state supreme court should retain the power it has now,
compared with 71% in the low knowledge group. Given conservative criticisms of activist
judges, one might expect Republicans to be much more supportive of reining in the courts. But
the new survey finds only 27% of Republicans saying their state supreme courts power to
decide controversial issues should be more limited. That is only slightly higher than the
percentage of Democrats (20%) with similar views.
As noted above, neither knowledge level nor political partisanship has much effect on public
support for upholding the authority of the judicial branch. It is likely that the NCSC Survey has
identified a basic, shared value in American society for keeping these kinds of decisions out of
the political realm as much as possible. When push comes to shove, many who say they wouldlike the courts to be less independent and pay more attention to public opinion nonetheless
reject the idea of shifting decision-making power away from the state supreme courts and
toward the other branches which are more subject to political influence.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
27/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
23
Summarizing Attitudes Toward the State Courts: Know ledge is Key
For the purposes of the NCSC Survey analysis, courts credibility refers to peoples attitudes on
the way the courts make decisions. To summarize attitudes toward the state courts, the survey
respondents were scored on a Courts
Credibility Index comprised of four measures
of attitudes toward the courts and their
decision-making: 1) the impact of politics; 2)
consideration for the general welfare; 3) the
value of an independent judiciary; and
4) support for the authority of the state
supreme court to decide controversial issues.
Respondents were classified into three groups
based on their index score. Those in the high
category (32% overall) mostly answered
three or four questions positively, those in thelow category (31%) mostly answered three of
the four questions negatively. The medium
group (37%) had a mix of positive and
negative answers. Table 5 provides a
breakdown of index scores by key subgroups.
Analysis of the Courts Credibility Index scores shows how different the high knowledge group is
from the rest of the adult population. Almost half (45%) of the high knowledge group scored
high on courts credibility, and less than a quarter (22%) scored low. In contrast, the medium
and low knowledge groups include more people classified as low in their courts credibilityattitudes than are classified as high.
Courts Credibility Index scores also show a strong relationship to level of confidence in the state
courts, as might be expected. About half (49%) of those with a lot of confidence score high for
credibility compared with a third (33%) of those with some confidence and just 15% of those
who have little or no confidence in the courts. Only small differences in credibility index scores
are observed by party and by whether state supreme court judges are elected in the
respondents state.
TABLE 5: COURTS CREDIBILITY ATTITUDESBY SUBGROUPS
Courts Credibility Index Score*
High(most pos.) Medium
Low(most neg.)
TOTAL 32% 37% 31%
Knowledge Index
High 45 33 22
Medium 29 35 36
Low 23 43 34
Confidence in Courts
A lot 49 32 19
Some 33 36 31
Not much/None 15 37 48
State Supreme Court
Judges elected 33 36 31Judges not elected 29 38 33
Party ID
Republican 33 33 34
Democrat 31 37 32
Independent 35 38 27
* Scores based on four items measuring attitudes toward the state courts
Percentages should be read down, in columns, for each subgroup.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
28/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
24
Public At Large, Informed Group Differ on Balance of Pow er Among Branches
The largest segment of the public
about half (49%) does not want to
see the balance of power between
the judiciary and the other branches
change. However, that leaves just
under half who say they would like to
see change one in four (24%) want
elected officials in the executive and
legislative branch to have more
control over the judiciary than they
do now and one in five (19%) want
these other branches to have less
control than they do now.
Once again, better informed Americans opinions diverge somewhat from the views of the public
at large. Like the broader public, those who score high on the knowledge index are most likely
to favor no shift in the balance of power (50%), but those in the high knowledge group who
favor change are more likely to say the two other branches should have lesspower over the
courts, not more (27% vs. 14%).
A Variety of Reasons for Changing the Balance of Power
When those who want the executive and legislative branches
to have more power over the courts are asked to explain
their views in their own words, two reasons are cited mostoften:
Perceived Efficiency: 19% say they think the governoror the state legislature will get more done than the
courts.
Fairness Issues/Favoritism: 15% say judges can bebiased, unfair, or out of touch and that to ensure
fairness the other branches should be better able to
rein them in.
For those in the high knowledge group who want the other
branches to have more control over the courts, concerns
about bias (33%) are cited more often than the belief that
more will get done (24%).
Perceived Efficiency(In Respondents Words)
Could get more laws passed
It would be done right/better decisionswould be made
Judges may be wrong/should not be leftup to an individual
Fairness Issues/Favoritism(In Respondents Words)
Judges are politically connected/ toomany favors are given
Judges make irrational judgments on
cases based on their personal feelings
Judges are out of touch/they dont listento the people
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
29/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
25
Those who want the other branches to have less control over
the courts most often cite the following four reasons:
Suspected Political Bias: 19% worry about political biaswhen the governor or the state legislature exert power
over the courts.
Expertise: 17% say judges have the expertise tointerpret the law better than other branches
Judicial Independence: 16% say judges should beable to act independently, without interference.
Separation/Balance of Power: 12% cite the generalprincipal of separation of power among the three
branches
Those in the high knowledge group are more likely than the
less well-informed to cite the general principal of separation
of power (21%).
Suspected Political Bias(In Respondents Words)
Politics should not play a rolein law enforcement
The judiciary should be freeof political influence
Judges need to make ru lings basedon logic, not politics
Expertise(In Respondents Words)
Judges have a lot more information andpractice on their side
Judges see more than the governordoes/they are more aware
of what is happening
Judges know the local area better thanthe governor and the legislature
Judicial Independence(In Respondents Words)
For judges to be completely fair, theyshould not have outside influence in
making decisions
I want state judges to have freedom tomake decisions for the public
The judiciary should be independentand a watchdog for the civil rights
of citizens
Separation/Balance of Power(In Respondents Words)
Each branch should have a clear anddefined area of power
Promotes checks and balances
Judges should be able to dotheir own thing
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
30/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
26
IV . THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY AND OTHERBRANCHES
Section Overview
The American public wants to see all three branches of state government be a big part of
addressing their states problems each with a role to play that is important. The NCSC Survey
results indicate that while the public generally favors their state legislators as leaders in solving
problems related to the justice system, it does not seem to have a strong desire for one branch
of state government to lead more than another. In the NCSC Survey, large majorities say they
would like to see each branch play a big role in efforts to address two issues facing most
states around the country prison overcrowding and caring for abused and neglected children.
When asked to choose one branch, none of the branches is selected by a majority to spearhead
efforts to deal with these problems in their state. Pluralities choose their state legislators to
take charge of efforts to address prison overcrowding (39%) and caring for neglected and
abused children (37%). The second choice for leadership depends on the issue, with the
governor being preferred to handle prison overcrowding (27%) and judges being selected as
the second choice to lead efforts regarding neglected and abused children (27%).
The survey results show a strong public preference for branches of state government to share
responsibility for addressing state problems. The results, however, cannot provide a definitive
answer about the publics leaning toward the state legislators for leadership. It is reasonable to
surmise it has to do with the fact that in all states the legislature is the branch that has the
most representation of the public itself because its members are elected, it includes both major
political parties, and its debates are open to the public and a matter of public record. The
governor, in contrast, represents only one party and may be perceived as being less
accountable to the whole electorate, making him or her less attractive as the leader in
addressing these types of issues. The plausible explanation for why state judges are not the
preferred leaders is altogether different in that these issues, while related to the judicial system,
are political in nature as well. The NCSC Survey results about the credibility of the state courts
suggest that the public does not like its judges mixed up in politics. So while Americans want
their judges, like their legislators and governors, to play a big role in helping to tackle problems
related to the judicial system, they do not think judges belong at the helm.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
31/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
27
The Public Wants Each State Branch to Play a Big Role in Problem Solving
As a means to determine which branch of state government the public would like to see take
the lead on important issues facing the states, the NCSC Inter-Branch Relations Survey asked a
short series of questions about prison overcrowding and about caring for neglected and abused
children. Brief explanations of each problem were provided so that respondents would all have
some accurate, shared information about the problems facing states to help them determine
which branch would make the best leader.
The survey reveals an American public with a strong preference for all three branches of state
government to be a part of problem-solving in their states. When asked how much of a role
a big role, small role or no role at all they would like to see each branch of government play
in efforts to address prison overcrowding and caring for neglected and abused children, solid
majorities say each branch should play a big role.
Specifically, seven in 10 would like to see their
state legislators play a big role in addressing
prison overcrowding, and about two-thirds
would like to see that level of involvement by
the governor. A somewhat smaller majority,
six in 10, say that state judges should play a
big role. But given the recent controversies in
many states about how to handle this issue,
and its direct relationship with prison
sentencing, it is not surprising that some people feel that judges should play a small rather than
big role. And the involvement of judges is more desirable when it comes to dealing with theproblem of caring for neglected and abused children. Nearly seven in 10 say that state judges
should play a big role in efforts to address this issue, practically equal to the number who says
that state legislators should play a big role. And six in 10 say they would like to see the
governor play a big role in efforts to address neglected and abused children.
Legislators Are Favored Leaders on Issues Facing States
As noted above, none of the branches of government garners the support of a majority to lead
efforts to address the problems of prison overcrowding or caring for abused and neglected
children. For each issue, a plurality of the public says that it would like to see state legislators
take the lead in addressing the problem, but the ranking is different for the second and third
choices depending on the issue.
TABLE 6: ROLE OF THE THREE BRANCHES IN SOLVINGSTATE JUDICIAL PROBLEMS
Percent Who Say BranchShould Play a Big Role
Legislators Judges Governor
In efforts to address
Prison overcrowding 69% 59% 64%
Caring for neglectedand abused children
69% 67% 62%
Percentages should be read across, by rows.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
32/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
28
Four in 10 adults (39%) say they would like their
state legislators to lead efforts to address prison
overcrowding in their state. Nearly three in 10
(27%) select the governor to lead these efforts,
while about one in four (22%) select state
judges. Fully a tenth admit they dont know
which branch should take the lead. Similarly,
37% of the public say their state legislators are
their choice to spearhead efforts to address the
problem of caring for neglected and abused
children in their state, but for this issue state
judges move up as the publics second choice to
lead with 27% naming judges and 24% naming
the governor.
Awareness of the Issues Has Little Impact on Opinions About Leadership
In many instances, survey analysis will show that awareness about an issue significantly
influences opinion about that issue and the more aware, the stronger the influence. This is
not the case, however, in the analysis of NCSC Inter-Branch Relations Survey questions about
prison overcrowding and caring for neglected and abused children. While large majorities of
Americans report they have seen, heard or read at least a little about these issues in their state
(82% for each issue), only a third say they have heard a lot about prison overcrowding and a
quarter say they have heard a lot about neglected and abused children. Yet, the views of themost aware adults and those who have little or no awareness are practically the same with
respect to which branch of government should take the lead in addressing these problems.
Issue awareness has an impact on opinions about the role the branches should play in efforts to
address one of the two problem areas included in the survey caring for abused and neglected
children. Those who have seen, heard or read a lot about this issue in their state are more
likely than those less aware to want judges to play a big role in addressing the problem (74%
vs. 65%). Those most aware of the situation are also more likely to want the governor to play
a big role (66% vs. 61%). This is significant because it is a rare instance where a subgroup
of the population ranks the three branches differently than the public as a whole does. Amongthe total public, legislators rank first in terms of the percent who think the branch should play a
big role in addressing the problem of neglected and abused children (69% say big role). But
legislators are displaced by judges for the top ranking of those most aware of this situation
(74% say big role). In fact, legislators do not even rank a clear second the governor ties the
legislators for second place (66% say each should play a big role).
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
33/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
29
Few Significant Factors in Determining Leadership Choices, Size of Role Branches Play
There are no especially strong influences on opinions about leadership. Several factors proved
to have little or no impact on which branch of state government Americans would like to see
lead efforts to address their states problems, including socio-demographic characteristics,
knowledge of state government and the courts, confidence in the courts, perceptions of court
credibility, personal experiences with the courts, partisanship, and governor approval.
Likewise, there are no consistent patterns of influence on opinions about which branches should
play a big role in efforts to deal with the problems of prison overcrowding and caring for
neglected and abused children.
V. THE JUDICIARYBUDGET PROCESS AND PRIORITIES
Section OverviewThe American public would prefer the branches of government share responsibility for deciding
what the state courts budget should be. Fully half endorse the idea of a non-partisan
committee of members appointed from all three branches making the final decisions about the
state courts budget. When asked to choose a branch of government specifically, the public is
divided about which one branch should ultimately decide the size of the state court budget. But
it favors the state legislature for the job and is least supportive of the state supreme court
having the final say.
State courts across the country are facing tough budget decisions and having to be creative
about ways to cut costs. The public indicates that some of the measures being considered are
tolerable but belt-tightening measures that directly affect decision-making capacity are not.
Majorities say that ceasing to hold jury trials and allowing attrition of judges are unacceptable
ways to cut costs. People are more amenable to the ideas of raising court fees and closing the
courthouse for one or more days a week as ways to reduce court budgets.
Tri-Branch Committee the Preferred Group to Make Court Funding Decisions
Americans do not seem to like their state judges, including those in the highest court, making
the final decisions in areas related to the administration of state government. Like the survey
results about leadership in addressing problems facing the state, the public as a whole seems to
be sending the message that the judiciary should have a voice in decisions about funding the
state courts but it should not lead these efforts.
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
34/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
30
The new NCSC Survey asked respondents which of the three branches of government should
have the final say on what the court budget should be if there are disagreements about how
much money the state courts need to meet their responsibilities. Four in 10 (42%) say they
would like their state legislature to have the final say on the state court budget, and another
three in 10 (30%) say the governor should make the ultimate decision. Notably fewer, two in
10 (21%), say that state supreme court judges should be the final decision-makers about the
court budget. And about a tenth (8%) are not able to make a choice for who should lead.
A follow-up question gauged the publics
willingness to have all three branches
determine the court budget instead of giving
the final say to one branch. Half say they
would prefer that a non-partisan committee
of members appointed from all three
government branches make decisions about
state court budgets, while four in 10 say they
would prefer to give the final say to the one
branch they selected in the previous question.
A Show of Firm Support by Those Who Select State Supreme Court to Decide Budget
Those who choose the state supreme court as the branch to have the final say about court
budgets are more likely to stick with their preference when given the option instead of letting a
committee of the three branches make the call. Specifically, less than half (45%) of those who
prefer the state supreme court to decide the court budget say they would rather see a
committee decide if that were an option. In comparison, when offered the committee as an
alternative, a majority of the supporters of the legislature (51%) and the governor (55%) opt
for the committee over their chosen branch to have the final say on the court budget.
TABLE 7: COMMITTEE VS. BRANCH COURT BUDGET DECISIONSBY BRANCH THAT SHOULD HAVE FINAL SAY
Percent Who Think Branch Should Have Final Say
State Supreme Court Legislature Governor
Give final say to
A non-partisan committee
of all three branches 45% 51% 55%One branch of government 46% 43% 42%
Dont know 8% 6% 3%
-
8/8/2019 Separate Branches Shared Responsibilites
35/62
A NATIONAL SURVEY ON STATE GOVERNMENT: EXPECTATIONS FORRELATIONS AMONG THE BRANCHES
PRINCETON SURVEYRESEARCH ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL APRIL 2009
31
No Factors Strongly Influence Choice of Branch or Preference for Committee
While there are some differences among subgroups with regard to which government branch
they are more likely to select to have the final say on the court budget, these are generally
differences of degree and do not upset the ranking of the public as a whole. In particular, no
groups emerge as especially likely to support the state supreme court as the arbiter of the statecourt budget, including those who express confidence in the state courts and those who have
mostly positive attitudes towards the courts and state court judges decision-making.
Similarly, there are groups that are more likely than others to say they prefer a non-partisan
committee make decisions about the court budget as opposed to one branch of government,
and vice versa. For example, 53% of the better informed public say they prefer a committee
decide the courts budget, compared with 44% of the least knowledgeable. In contrast, just
under half (49%) of those who have a lot of confidence in the courts say they would prefer one
branch have the final say, compared with 39% who have only some or little confidence in the
courts. But none of the differences across subgroups reverses the overall trend that thecommittee is the publics preferred process for vetting the state court budget.
Preserving the Courts Decision-Mak ing Capacity is the Priority for Budget
State governments across the United States are feeling the sting of a national economy in crisis.
And the tough decisions that have to be made to manage state budgets are taking their toll on
the budgets of state courts. The NCSC Survey asked respondents to consider several steps that
might be taken in order to reduce state court budgets: 1) stop holding jury trials; raise the fees
charged people who want to take a case to court; not replace judges who retire or die; close
the courthouse for one or more days each week.
Overall, the American public indicates that t