Americans split on party lines over support for Supreme Court: Survey
The new YouGov poll found that 45 percent of respondents strongly or somewhat disapprove of the Supreme Court's work, while 40 percent said they strongly or somewhat approve. Some 14 percent were unsure.
The majority of GOP voters, 73 percent, strongly or somewhat approve of the Supreme Court's handling of recent cases, far higher than 34 percent of independents and just 14 percent of Democrats.
Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor had the highest net favorability rating on the court's bench with plus 4 percentage points. Ketanji Brown Jackson had a plus 2 percentage point rating.
The poll found that Democratic Party voters view Sotomayor the most favorably, while they see Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh as the most unfavorable. Among Republicans, Kavanaugh and Thomas were seen as the most favorable, while Brown Jackson and Sotomayor were viewed the least favorably.
Around a quarter, 26 percent, of respondents said the Supreme Court has too much power, a decrease from last year when 42 percent of Americans said the same thing.
The sentiment has dropped the most among Democrats, going from 73 percent in 2024 to 41 percent this year. About 22 percent of independents said the nation's highest court has too much power, a 16-point decrease from a year ago when it was 38 percent.
Most respondents, 55 percent, said the Supreme Court has the right amount of power.
A recent poll from AP-NORC Research Center found Americans' confidence in the Supreme Court has increased slightly, but that around one-in-three adults are still wary of the country's highest court.
The Supreme Court's approval was at 51 percent among Americans in February, according to a Marquette Law School national poll. The other 49 percent disapproved.
Friday's survey was conducted between June 30 and July 2 among 1,043 U.S. adults. The margin of error was around 4 percentage points.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
27 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's latest Epstein distraction — falsely accusing Obama of ‘treason'
A House Oversight subcommittee Advertisement So, of course, the administration sent Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Gabbard falsely stated that there's 'irrefutable evidence' that Obama and his national security team tried to 'launch a coup' against Trump with bogus claims that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to benefit the former reality TV host. In 2020, a Advertisement But as with the deadly insurrection that he incited on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump is making another mendacious effort to rewrite history for his own self-serving narrative. Trump attacks Obama because his Obama-hating base loves it. And because it's generally a waste of time responding to Trump's frequent tirades, the former president usually chooses silence and 'Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,' read Obama called out Trump's obvious attempt to create a diversion to quell the public's insatiable appetite for news about the Epstein files, a burgeoning crisis of Trump's own making. For years, some people now in Trump's Cabinet seeded MAGA conspiracies about an Epstein 'client list' as well as his 2019 When Trump was reelected, Ever since, Trump has been grasping at counterprogramming to distract from a story that shows no signs of waning. Advertisement In a break from its usually tight-lipped protocol concerning Trump's health, the White House When that story didn't garner the days of coverage that the administration might have sought, Trump then tapped into a reliable and trusted friend: racism. On his social media site on July 21, Trump, out of nowhere, Despite Trump's foolishness, During the Trump years, much of the media has too often become smitten with whatever shiny thing he has twirled in their direction. This time, they're calling his many diversions exactly what they are. Some Democrats, finally seizing a way to upend this administration, have come together with Republicans to vote for more transparency from the Trump White House about the Epstein files. And some of Trump's staunchest MAGA loyalists, even if they haven't wholly turned against Trump, remain angry and are demanding answers. Which leaves Trump in the exact same place he's spent weeks trying to escape — mired in a self-inflicted scandal that he can't control as it threatens to consume his presidency. Advertisement Renée Graham is a Globe columnist. She can be reached at
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trudeau radically overhauled the Senate — will Carney keep his reforms?
Former prime minister Justin Trudeau upended 150 years of Canadian parliamentary tradition when he dumped Liberal senators, named Independents to the upper house and generally stripped the place of partisan elements. The experiment produced mixed reviews, with some old-guard senators — those who were there well before Trudeau — arguing the Senate is now irrelevant, slower, less organized and more expensive. Some of Trudeau's appointees say the reforms have helped the Red Chamber turn the page on the near-death experience of the expenses scandal, which they maintain was fuelled by the worst partisan impulses. Defenders of the new regime say partisans are pining for a model that's best left in the dustbin of history. The Senate has been more active in amending government bills and those changes are not motivated by party politics or electoral fortunes — they're about the country's best interest, reformers say. As the debate rages internally over whether the last 10 years of change have been worth it, Prime Minister Mark Carney has said almost nothing about his vision for the upper the current model, would-be senators are recommended by an outside panel but the decision is still up to the prime minister. Most of Trudeau's early picks were strictly non-partisan but, as polls showed his party was headed for an almost certain defeat, he increasingly named Liberals to the chamber. Carney has already scrapped Trudeau's carbon tax, introduced legislation to bypass Trudeau-era regulations, repaired once-frosty relations with the provinces and taken a different approach to the trade war. All that has some senators wondering whether the non-partisan push in the Red Chamber will be the next domino to fall. In an interview with CBC Radio's The House, House leader Steve MacKinnon signalled there may indeed be more changes coming. "I think the Senate is very much a work in progress," he said. "We continue to work constructively with the Senate in its current configuration and as it may evolve. I know many senators, the various groups in the Senate and others continue to offer some constructive thoughts on that." Asked if Carney will appoint Liberals, MacKinnon said the prime minister will name senators who are "attuned to the vagaries of public opinion, attuned to the wishes of Canadians and attuned to the agenda of the government as is reflected in the election results." Carney is interested in senators who "are broadly understanding of what the government's trying to achieve," MacKinnon said. As to whether he's heard about efforts to revive a Senate Liberal caucus, MacKinnon said: "I haven't been part of any of those discussions." Alberta Sen. Paula Simons is a member of the Independent Senators Group, the largest in the chamber and one mostly composed of Trudeau appointees (she is one of them, appointed in 2018). Simons said she knows the Conservatives would scrap Trudeau's reforms at the first opportunity. What concerns her more are those Liberals who are also against the changes. "There's a fair bit of rumbling about standing up a Liberal caucus again. And I am unalterably opposed to that," she said. When the last Liberal caucus was disbanded, some of its members regrouped as the Progressive Senate Group, which now includes senators who were never Liberals. "To unscramble that omelette, whether you're a Liberal or a Conservative, I think would be a betrayal of everything that we've accomplished over the last decade," Simons said. "I think the Senate's reputation has improved greatly as a result of these changes. I think the way we are able to improve legislation has also increased tenfold. It would be foolish and wasteful to reverse that." Still, she said there's been pushback from some Trudeau appointees. Senate debates are now longer, committee hearings feature more witnesses and there's more amendments to legislation than ever before, she said. Not to mention Independent senators can't be whipped to vote a certain way. All of that makes the legislative process more difficult to navigate. "Partisan Liberals don't like the new independent Senate because they can't control it as easily," she said. Marc Gold, Trudeau's last government representative in the Senate who briefly served under Carney before retiring, said his advice to the new prime minister is to keep the Senate the way it is. "The evolution of the Senate to a less partisan, complementary institution is a good thing. I think it's a success, and I certainly hope that it continues," Gold said. On the other side of the divide, Quebec Sen. Leo Housakos, the leader of the Conservative Senate caucus, welcomes the idea of injecting some partisanship. He said, under the current model, the chamber is less influential. "The place has become, unfortunately, an echo chamber," he said. Housakos said the old Senate was more honest, when members were more transparent about their political leanings. Many of Trudeau's Independent appointees are Liberal-minded and their voting record suggests they often align with the government, Housakos said. "Look at how often they've held the government to account," he said. "Look how often they've asked the difficult questions in the moments when the government needed … their feet held to the fire." Simons sees things differently. "It's really difficult for people who've been brought up in a partisan milieu, whether they're Conservative or Liberal or New Democrat, to understand that it is actually possible to be a political actor without a team flag," she said. "It's not my job to stand for a political party." Saskatchewan Sen. Pamela Wallin is a member of the Canadian Senators Group, which is made up of non-partisan senators including some who, like her, formerly sat as Conservatives. She said the current process has produced some senators who are political neophytes, unfamiliar with the Senate's traditional role. "I don't care if somebody belongs to a political party.… I think people need to be better educated about what they're signing up for," she said. "Our job is to be an arbiter of legislation and laws put forward by the House of Commons. It's not a place where we can all ride our individual hobby horses." That's a reference to the proliferation of Senate public bills — legislation introduced by senators themselves. These bills often have no hope of passing through both chambers, while still taking time and resources to sort through. There is data to support Wallin's contention that there are more of these bills than there were before the Trudeau reforms. During Stephen Harper's last term, there were 56 Senate public bills introduced and nine of them were passed into law, according to a CBC News review of parliamentary data. By comparison, Trudeau's final session saw 92 bills introduced over a shorter time period. Only 12 of them passed — a worse success rate. In the first few weeks of this new Parliament, more than 32 such bills have already been introduced, some of them a revival of those that died on the order paper. Wallin said those bills often reflect senators' "personal interests or the interests that they've shared over a lifetime." She wants the Senate to take a "back to basics" approach. "Our job is sober second thought," she said. Wallin is also calling for better regional representation in the Senate, which may be a tricky proposition given the constitutional realities. A change in seat allocation would require cracking open that foundational document, a politically unpalatable idea. Still, Alberta separatists are agitating for change, calling the current breakdown grossly unfair. Housakos said depriving some parts of the country of meaningful representation needs to be addressed. In B.C., for example, the province's nearly six million people are represented by just six senators. P.E.I., by comparison, has four senators for about 180,000 people — an allocation formula that dates back to Confederation. "Western Canada has a legitimate beef. They are not fairly represented in the upper chamber," Housakos said. "It's probably the biggest problem that needs to be addressed." But the government isn't interested in that sort of change, MacKinnon said. "I see no space on the public agenda for constitutional discussions," he said.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Mike Johnson shuts Congress for summer to avoid dealing with Trump handling of Epstein files
House Speaker Mike Johnson on Tuesday ground the House of Representatives to a screeching halt in order to block Democrats from bringing up amendments calling for the release of files related to sex trafficking financier Jeffrey Epstein. The speaker's decision to virtually shut down procedure in the House of Representatives — a week before Congress' summer break — comes as President Donald Trump continues to receive criticism from all sides for his handling of the promised release of all government files related to Epstein. But Johnson's early recess could also impact the House's ability to keep the government open when they return and allow political crises to mushroom when members go back home to face their constituents. The move to halt the action of the House Rules committee came after Democrats repeatedly tried to introduce amendments to force the disclosure of files related to Epstein, who was found hanged in his New York prison cell in 2019. Johnson expressed his frustration over what he described as the Democrats' attempts to weaponize the Rules process, at times pounding his fist on the podium talking about Epstein, attacking the minority for their supposed hypocrisy for covering for former President Joe Biden's diminished state in the second half of his administration. 'We're not going to allow them to engage in that charade,' Johnson told reporters during his weekly press conference. 'They controlled the Department of Justice for the last four years,' the speaker said. 'Has anyone forgotten they had all these files the entire time?' But Rep. Jim McGovern, the ranking Democrat on the Rules Committee, criticized Johnson's maneuvering. 'I mean, it tells me that he's scared s***less,' McGovern told The Independent. 'I've never seen anything quite like this. I mean, where, I mean, literally, the Speaker of the House just canceled everything and said, you know, as the song goes, 'See you in September.'' Republicans have hoped to shift the conversation more toward touting the merits of their 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' legislation that Trump signed into law on July 4. But the party fell into bedlam this month after the Justice Department in conjunction with the FBI released a two-page memo that determined that Epstein had no client list and that no 'further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.' That came despite the fact that many officials who would join the Trump administration such as Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino pledged they would release additional information about Epstein. Republicans came into further chaos when last week The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump allegedly sent a bawdy 50th birthday card message to Epstein, his former friend whom he broke with before the feds began investigating Epstein publicly. The president vehemently denied that he sent it and filed a $10 million federal lawsuit against the paper, its parent company News Corp and its founder Rupert Murdoch. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise and Johnson insisted that Trump wanted to get to the bottom of the story. 'Trump's in the courts right now trying to get a lot of that information unsealed so the American public can see it,' Scalise said. But Trump only announced he would ask Bondi to release grand jury transcripts after the WSJ reported its story. Trump himself has called the Epstein conspiracy theories over which he once fanned the flames a 'hoax' and now says 'my PAST supporters have bought into this 'bullshit,' hook, line, and sinker.' The halting of votes for the House Rules Committee means that the House will not be able to tee up votes to pass many of the spending bills that Congress hoped to pass before the August recess, when members break to go back to their districts. When it returns, Congress must pass its spending bills by the end of September to avoid a government shutdown. But Johnson might not then be able to avoid a vote on Epstein. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) teamed up with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) to pass a discharge petition, which allows them to circumvent the committee process to bring a vote on releasing files related to Epstein to the floor. 'They know that the public wants that, and they don't want their members voting,' Khanna told The Independent. 'I mean, I've ever seen anything like it.' So far, many Republicans have joined onto the petition and every Democrat will likely sign on, much to the chagrin of Johnson. 'We're not going to play political games with this,' Johnson said. 'You have to allow the legislation to ripen, and you also have to allow the administration the space to do what it is doing.' Discharge petitions need seven legislative business days to ripen. The House broke late on Thursday evening into Friday morning last week and its last legislative day before the recess will be on Wednesday, meaning the petition will be kicked into when the House reconvenes in September. But even if the House were to pass Massie and Khanna's legislation, it would need to face a vote in the Senate, where it would face a more significant challenge. On Tuesday afternoon, Bill Gates, the multibillionaire co-founder of Microsoft who was a friend of Epstein, was roaming the basement of the Senate. He did not respond to questions from The Independent about disclosing files related to Epstein.
