Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorBentsen, Henrik Litleré
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-29T13:32:07Z
dc.date.available2020-06-29T13:32:07Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.PublishedBentsen HL. Dissent, Legitimacy, and Public Support for Court Decisions: Evidence from a Survey‐Based Experiment. Law & society review. 2019;53(2):588-610eng
dc.identifier.issn1540-5893
dc.identifier.issn0023-9216
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1956/23096
dc.description.abstractScholars often argue that whereas unanimous rulings should boost public support for court decisions, dissents should fuel public opposition. Previous studies on public responses to U.S. Supreme Court decisions suggest that unanimity does in fact bolster support. However, a recent study has also found that dissents may increase support among opponents of a court decision by suggesting evidence of procedural justice. By examining how individuals react to dissents from the Supreme Court of Norway, this article is the first study outside the U.S. context of the public's reaction to unanimity and dissent. Breaking with the common notion of the negative effects of dissent on public support, the article shows that when the Supreme Court handles cases of higher political salience, the formulation of dissenting opinions can be a meaningful way of securing greater support for its policy outputs by suggesting evidence of procedural justice. Contrary to recent studies, however, this positive influence of dissent is irrespective of individuals' ex ante policy views.en_US
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherWileyeng
dc.titleDissent, Legitimacy, and Public Support for Court Decisions: Evidence from a Survey‐Based Experimenteng
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.date.updated2020-01-31T10:02:45Z
dc.description.versionacceptedVersion
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2019 Law and Society Association. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12402
dc.identifier.cristin1690071
dc.source.journalLaw & society review
dc.source.pagenumber588-610
dc.identifier.citationLaw & society review. 2019;53(2):588-610
dc.source.volume53
dc.source.issue2


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel