Poll: Public Overwhelmingly Rejects Calls for Court Packing and Attacks on Supreme Court

Despite the reversal of Roe v. Wade and unrelenting attacks in the media and by Democratic members of Congress, the Supreme Court still has the overwhelming support of the American people. While figures like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) have called for court packing, the public in a just-released Mason-Dixon poll show that 68% of Americans oppose her efforts and those of various law professors.  There were also a couple of surprises.

Despite the endless columns and stories discussing support for court packing and radical proposals for changing the Court, the public has never supported these calls from Democratic activists. Nevertheless, the continual drumbeat continued as the public tuned out the media.

The narrative has been repeated endlessly for years: the Supreme Court is hopelessly ideological and divided. As I have previously written, this critique ignores the fact that the vast majority of the Court’s decisions are unanimous, near unanimous, or do not break down neat ideological lines.

The rationalization of a rigidly partisan Court gives license to those demanding the addition of an immediate liberal majority or the call of a Georgetown law for “more aggressive” targeting of individual justices.

While members like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) have questioned the need for a Supreme Court, the public retains its faith and fealty to the Court.

Polling shows 91% of Americans believe an independent judiciary is a crucial safeguard of our civil liberties and 72% of Americans believe that the politicization of the Supreme Court threatens judicial independence. Notably, 59% oppose attacks on the integrity of some of the justices that have become commonplace in the media and among liberal commentators.

The polling also shows, again, the disconnect between the mainstream media and the public. Despite the continual attacks on the Court, the public is not buying it.

One surprise is that 69% of Americans do not want Congress taking over the rules for judicial ethics. That may reflect the same discomfort and distrust generated by the coverage. The media and legal analysts have frittered away their credibility with largely one-sided, highly partisan coverage.

It also shows how the Democrats have misplayed this issue. President Joe Biden has been disgracefully absent without leave on issues like court packing. He refused to state his position during the 2020 election despite that fact that this was a major issue for voters. He then pandered to the far left with a commission loaded with radical law professors and experts to explore court packing and other extreme changes.

The faith of the public in the Court is reassuring that, despite years of attacks in the media and in Congress, citizens retain their objectivity and knowledge of the underlying issues. While the Congress and media are still at near record lows, the Court itself has ticked up in popularity. As members of Congress insist that the public has lost trust in the Court, they ignore that it retains the trust of 43% the public while Congress is at 18%. That is still not where it should be, but it is remarkable given the thousands of stories hitting the Court, its members, and its alleged partisan agendas.

30 thoughts on “Poll: Public Overwhelmingly Rejects Calls for Court Packing and Attacks on Supreme Court”

  1. “It’s the [Constitution], stupid!”

    – James Carville

    Polling and the vote are far less important than the rights and freedoms, and the severe limitations and restrictions on government, secured by the Constitution.

    The singular American failure has been and remains the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court, which has abandoned the clear meaning and intent of the U.S. Constitution.

    The judicial branch is an insidious and unconstitutional hybrid (legislative/executive) branch of government which demonstrably supports the principles of communism.

    The U.S. Constitution established a restricted-vote republic, including voting criteria set by the States.

    Turnout was 11.6% in 1788.

    Voting criteria were Male, European, 21 and 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.

    The Communist Manifesto and “fake” Constitution of China establish a one man, one vote “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

    “the people are nothing but a great beast…

    I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”

    – Alexander Hamilton

    “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”

    “If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”

    – Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775

    “[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”

    – Ben Franklin, 1787

    Constitution of China
    Article 3

    The state organs of the People’s Republic of China apply the principle of democratic

    The National People’s Congress and the local people’s congresses at different levels are
    instituted through democratic election. They are responsible to the people and subject
    to their supervision.

    All administrative, supervisory, judicial and procuratorial organs of the State are created
    by the people’s congresses to which they are responsible and by which they are

    The division of functions and powers between the central and local state organs is
    guided by the principle of giving full play to the initiative and enthusiasm of the local
    authorities under the unied leadership of the central authorities.

  2. Professor Turley,

    Please provide a working link to the poll that is the subject of your article. Your link goes to Fox News, and Fox News does not link to the poll it cites. Without it, I doubt even 5% of your readers read the underlying poll questions and/or data. It is a disservice to your readers if they are not able to easily check primary sources.

    I believe this is the poll you are referencing: https://firstliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/NationalPoll623Results-1.pdf

    If so, there are a few issues. This was commissioned by a partisan group, First Liberty, through the conservative-leaning pollster Mason-Dixon, and as a result, the questions are not neutral. For example, this question is clearly not neutral:

    “QUESTION: For over 150 years, the United States Supreme Court has had nine justices. “Courtpacking” is generally defined as increasing the number of Supreme Court seats, primarily to alter the ideological balance of the court. Do you support or oppose “court-packing”?”

    This is clearly a leading question. Leading questions are intentionally framed to cultivate bias in respondents, and by providing this selectively framed “history” of Supreme Court composition, the pollster clearly wanted to portray the Supreme Court’s composition in a particular way. Congress has changed the size of the Court many times in our nation’s history, and it has even been larger than 9 justices previously. How many respondents were aware of this history? Why leave that out if your intent is to be neutral? Either provide no context, or one that provides the whole story. Selectively choosing the historical context is not how polls should be conducted.

    Further, the use of the term “court-packing” is a derogatory term. It is not a neutral term.

    To demonstrate how a leading question affects results, imagine a Democrat pollster asking the question. The Supreme Court’s composition is overwhelmingly made up of Republican appointees. The Supreme Court’s size has been changed six times in our nation’s history. Do you support adding justices to the Supreme Court a seventh time to balance the number of Democratic-appointed Justices and Republican-appointed Justices?

    Of course, that wouldn’t be a fair question, either. But, that should demonstrate why using a carefully selected context/history leads to useless results.

  3. This is why I do not sweat what is happening in the country. Regardless of the attacks and politics against the Supreme Court, faith has not faltered in them. Sure, popularity rises and falls on various cases, but that has always happened. How often has one been unhappy with a decision because it went against beliefs or only half a loaf. This court only reviews the hardest of the hardest of the cases and even they cannot always agree! Even better, this court does not nearly always agree on partisan lines. That is how hard the cases are to determine!

    Always remember, history shows the court is not perfect, but they do one of the hardest jobs imaginable.

    The other lesson is the public is tuning out the pundits. The screaming is not working no matter how loud they get and that is a good thing for all of us

  4. In other news: “Liberal Members of Congress Sponsor Bill to Change Logo on Supreme Court Building to Read ‘Equity Justice under the Law'”.

    “Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sponsored a bill last evening requiring the phrase on the facade of the Supreme Court Building, (Equal Justice Under The Law) be removed and replaced with Equity Justice Under The Law, stating ‘Equal justice is a racist, antebellum slogan that is outdated and patriarchal. With this new slogan we can finally force the Supreme Court to take out Whitey and compel America to pay reparations, and make little girls accept trans into their bathrooms.'”

      1. Next they will produce a gay male version of Chicago’s musical “Cell Block Tango”. Actually these muscle queens are pretty good and very funny. The Trans folks, not so much

  5. Since when does actual public opinion every amount to anything what with our propaganda machine media/education industries riding shotgun for the prog/left?

  6. Interesting, but article could use a bit of copyediting, or at least proofreading. Just sayin’.

  7. The court recently ruled unanimously in two cases.
    IIRC, both were in regards to government over reach. Sorry, dont recall the details.
    Seeing the 68% approval rating is good to see.

  8. There is a glimmer of hope for our republic. It seems that the pendulum has reached its high point and is swinging back towards the center.
    Or course it will go too far to the right and a future correction will occur.

  9. Radical leftists (DNC) cannot debate their agenda items in a free and open exchange of ideas. They are forced to control the game, the rules, the umpire, the field. ALL of it because the people, when informed, reject Democrat ideas

    The elections are wrapped up in 6 to 8 swing states. They are corrupt in a dozen Democrat cities, and votes are manufactured at will. That locks up the White House and Senate. See Georgia. The Federal govt audit revealed the Dominion system they use is buggy, hackable, and can change vote totals. Raffensberg refuses to do anything until after the 2024 elections.

    So the Dems dont have to worry about elections, and if they can pack SCOTUS, they will just institute their policies through litigation. Think 2cnd amendment. Without SCOTUS protecting citizens from dem politicians, our civil protections will slowly fade out of existence.

    1. True, but often we’re hearing Dem fascist politicos shout that they will ignore SCOTUS rulings they do not like. In any case, with or without Dem vote rigging, the deep blue cities will continue to outvote the rest of their states; case in point, Colorado, Illinois, California, New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia…and coming soon, Texas.

  10. “While members like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) have questioned the need for a Supreme Court . . .”

    Of course she does. Totalitarians do not like checks on their power — not so long as they are the Voice of the people.

  11. “believe that the politicization of the Supreme Court threatens judicial independence”

    A revision:
    “believe that the politicization of, well, everything threatens our independence”

    Dishonest racket of the worst kind.

    1. Media and Jurisprudence are a toxic mix – Stop Drinking the Cool-aid and Unplug (Get off the Grid)

  12. The 68% approval rating is reassuring to see. I hope the same approval rating holds true for retaining the Electoral College for as many here have stated, ruling by simple majority is nothing more than mob rule dressed in fine linen.

  13. Hillary Clinton–> Elizabeth Warren—>AOC. I think that these ladies are are 3 different models of Fembots. Hillary was obviously the first model and is rapidly timing out on her functional status if not already having passed her use-by-date. Warren is the new and improved model but still shows perfection has a long way to go. AOC-well this was a discard that crawled off the terminally damaged pile and escaped into the populace.
    If they keep beating this drum, the Republicans might start to think that this is a good idea and launch a preemptive strike, should they win both houses and the presidency in 2024. They might even remove the filibuster. It’s that goose-gander thing.

    1. Hillary Clinton–> Elizabeth Warren—>AOC. I think that these ladies are are 3 different models…

      All three college educated. The first two actualy do posses knowledge. thy are wrong about govt and are forced to ignore history, but smart. AOC? Has she uttered a single thoughtful thing?

      AOC along with today’s Professor and his dog, remind us a degree(s) are lousy predictors of intelligence. We have just went through covid, that was 100% worse, because the credentialed, and not accomplished, were in charge. ALL the core issues, the educated, were 180 degrees from right.

  14. I’m guessing that polling the public on any Democrat issue, from crime to reparations, would show that the party is out of step with a majority of Americans. That’s why they have to rush Joe off stage whenever he’s in front of reporters; why they refuse to allow primary debates; and why his spokesperson lies constantly about his positions. The Democrats are steeped in lies and deceit, from Russiagate to the Ukraine war to their “get Trump” agenda. RIP America.

  15. Activists act, they don’t think. Time to ridicule and ignore anyone that identifies as an activist.

    1. This poll was commissioned by First Liberty Institute. It was conducted by Mason- Dixon Polling & Strategy, Inc. of Jacksonville, Florida from May 30 through June 2, 2023. A total of 1,100 registered voters were interviewed nationwide by telephone.


      Mason Dixon Polling outfit is reliable and nonpartisan. The poll results are sound

      “Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy is an independent polling firm that conducts voter surveys for news media, lobbyists, advocacy groups, trade associations, and political action committees. Mason-Dixon is the nation’s most active state polling organization, conducting copyrighted public opinion polls for news media organizations in all 50 states. These media clients include over 250 local television affiliates and over 100 daily newspapers.”


        1. Oh, C’mon Larry, if anyone knows how polls can be jerked around it is you.
          Polls are typically no better than the paper they are printed on. Your unsettled state in reaction to the polls speaks volumes. Your bias is showing, better tuck it back in.

Leave a Reply