Trust In The U.S. Judicial System Has Plummeted By 24% Since 2020
It is one of the "largest country-level drops" measured globally, placing U.S. courts in the company of politically unstable countries like Uzbekistan, Myanmar, Venezuela, and Syria.
It is a shock but no surprise (except, apparently, to the media).
The U.S. judiciary and court system have suffered a crushing loss of public confidence since the 2020 election of Democrat President Joe Biden.
A recent Gallup Poll shows public confidence in the judiciary and courts has fallen by 24 points since 2020, which is “among the steepest declines Gallup has measured globally” since it began measuring the category in 2006.
Only 35% of Americans have trust in the courts, which is 20 points lower than the median for the 38 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Until 2020, Americans’ perceptions of their courts were in line with the median for OECD.
Lawfare
Gallup says a “likely factor” in the drop is lawfare against former GOP President Donald J. Trump. Lawfare is a form of politicization of the courts intended to discredit and disqualify a political opponent. Since 2020, Trump has been beset with questionable criminal and civil prosecutions in Democratic strongholds like New York City, Georgia, and Washington, D.C. But the public, which overwhelmingly elected Trump last month, wasn’t buying it.
Gallup also says Democrats’ trust in the judicial branch may have fallen between 2021 and 2022 due to the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning abortion protections under Roe v. Wade but adds that trust rebounded in 2023 before sinking again in 2024. This indicates the Court’s decision to return the issue of abortion to the states had limited impact.
Corruption And Lack Of Accountability
Other reasons for the public’s drop in confidence in the judiciary and the courts are not hard to discern. They relate to perceptions of corruption and lack of accountability.
As an attorney and long-time observer of the court, I argued last summer that the U.S. Supreme Court is asking for trouble by refusing to adopt an enforceable ethics code. Over the years, Justice Clarence Thomas accepted gifts valued at $4.2 million, including at least 38 “destination vacations” from billionaire “pals” with interests that come before the U.S. Supreme Court. The actions of Justice Thomas and some other justices on the court, are arguably - if not obviously - corrupt.
Yet, the Supreme Court does nothing, satisfied to protect its “entitlements” through a conspicuous lack of accountability.
My 12-year-long battle to enforce the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1968 ended when Chief Judge Miranda Du of Nevada falsified (i.e., made up, invented, lied about) what she termed “critical” evidence in the case. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit adopted this bogus “critical” evidence and dismissed my appeal earlier this year. The Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit, Mary Murguia, then dismissed my judicial misconduct complaints on specious grounds.
There is no independent investigation of federal judicial misconduct complaints.
When the federal judiciary receives a complaint of judicial misconduct, the chief judge of the judicial circuit where the complaint is filed routinely overlooks the misconduct, claiming it has to do with the merits of the case.
When there is no accountability, people lose respect for the institution.
If there is merit to the claim, the chief judge of the circuit arbitrarily lets the judge off the hook, just because s/he can.
When complaints are meritorious and are leaked to the public, the chief judge almost always allows the dirty judge to retire with a fat pension, paying no penalty for what may be years of misconduct.
Secretive Courts
Bloomberg did an investigation of a particularly sordid case of corruption involving a Texas bankruptcy judge. However, the media normally either abets the corruption (as in, serving as cheerleader for Trump prosecutions) or ignores problems with the judiciary and courts.
One reason for the lack of scrutiny of this important branch of government is that America’s judicial system is complicated and secretive.
For example, the federal judiciary refuses to allow its proceedings to be video livestreamed, so the public cannot evaluate how judges conduct court proceedings and assess the credibility of arguments and evidence. Only a few members of the press and public are permitted to physically sit in the courtroom when the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments. The Court issues audio recordings and a transcript of oral arguments, which is not the same as seeing what is happening.
Another reason for the media’s reticence to criticize the courts may be the nature of media ownership by billionaires and multinational corporations. Criticism might result in negative blowback for other ownership interests. Why bother?
In the final analysis, it seems the public thought Democrats were using the courts to unfairly tag Trump as a convicted felon and keep him off the campaign trail during the 2024 election cycle.
Former Trump special prosecutor Nathan Wade recently admitted that he met twice with officials in Biden’s administration while he worked for Fulton County DA Fani Willis during her probe into alleged election interference by Trump. More evidence of possible collusion may come out in the weeks ahead, after Trump takes office.
Ultimately, Americans are good people who play by the rules and disapprove of cheating and fraud. They want their courts to do the same. It may be just that simple.
The Gallup poll survey consists of telephone interviews with 1,000 U.S. adults from June 28 to Aug. 1.