Supreme Court’s Approval Low, But Not a Crisis of Legitimacy

2 min read

As the Supreme Court prepares for its new term, it faces a public relations challenge: a record low approval rating. Gallup reported in July that only 33% of Americans approve of the Court’s performance, the lowest in 26 years. Another survey, from Marquette Law School, shows the Court is still underwater, with 47% approval and 53% disapproval.

Approval Ratings Reflect Polarization

Advocates for Supreme Court reform may see low approval as a sign of lost legitimacy. However, a closer look at the data suggests that the decline in approval ratings is primarily due to polarization, not a broader legitimacy crisis. The drop in approval was driven mainly by Republicans, whose support for the Court fell from 79% in September 2025 to 58% now. Democratic approval has remained around 12%, and independent approval is at 35%, both near historic lows.

A Broader Trend of Institutional Distrust

Confidence in major institutions has also declined. Gallup’s June survey found that average confidence in the 14 major institutions it tracks is at 27%, just one point above the all-time low. The Supreme Court itself is at 27%, matching the national average, while the criminal justice system is at 17%, television news at 14%, and Congress at 9%. Only the military and police are more trusted than the Court.

Public Support for Court Decisions

Despite low approval ratings, many Americans still support the Court’s decisions. Marquette Law School surveyed opinions on 13 decisions from the last term and found that majorities favored 11 of them. Sixty-six percent backed the Court’s rejection of President Trump’s tariffs, 63% supported the birthright-citizenship ruling, and 70% approved the decision preventing Trump from removing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.

Legitimacy is About Legal Accuracy, Not Popularity

Approval ratings are not the best measure of judicial legitimacy. The Court’s role is to interpret the law, often against the majority. For example, the Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard was widely supported, while Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization remains unpopular. The Court’s independence is crucial for deciding legal questions, even when political sentiments are against it.

Not a ‘Trump Court’

The Court’s decisions in the last term show a consistent jurisprudential approach. The majority often uses originalist and textualist methods, emphasizing separation of powers and federalism. This approach has led to decisions that frustrate both sides, such as expanding presidential removal power, allowing Trump to wind down Temporary Protected Status, and invalidating Hawaii’s gun restrictions.

Reforms Should Be Based on Merit, Not Popularity

Proposals for reform, such as court-packing or term limits, should be evaluated on their own merits. A dip in approval, especially during an era of declining trust in institutions, does not justify changing the Constitution. The Court’s legitimacy lies in its ability to interpret the law correctly and consistently.

Source: Daily Wire

Written by

Connor Davis