These poll numbers were released earlier today by Rasmussen Reports -- "an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information."
56% Say It's Okay To Oppose Supreme Court Nominees Over Ideology Or Judicial Philosophy
Monday, April 19, 2010
President Obama soon will announce his second nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, and 56% of U.S. voters believe it is fair for a U.S. senator to oppose an otherwise qualified court nominee because of disagreements over ideology or judicial philosophy.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that only 29% do not think it is fair for a senator to oppose a legally and professionally qualified nominee on the grounds of ideology or judicial philosophy. Fifteen percent (15%) are not sure.
While 65% of Republicans and 59% of voters not affiliated with either major party think ideology and judicial philosophy are legitimate grounds for opposition, Democrats are more closely divided on the question: 45% agree, but 37% think it's not fair to oppose nominees on those grounds.
Additionally, 52% of voters believe that in picking someone to serve on the Supreme Court, a nominee's legal background is more important than ensuring a court that is as diverse as American society. But 36% think ensuring a diverse court is more important. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.
Thirty-nine percent (39%) of voters nationwide already believe the Supreme Court is too liberal . Twenty-five percent (25%) think the high court is too conservative, and 27% feel the court's ideological balance is about right.
At the same time, 45% believe that justices nominated by Obama will be too liberal, while 41% believe the nominees will be about right . There's very little concern that the president's nominees will be too conservative.
Voters have consistently and overwhelmingly said in national surveys that justices should make their decisions based on what's written in the U.S. Constitution and on legal precedents rather than on a sense of fairness and justice. But voters also tend to think Obama believes the court should rule on the basis of fairness and justice.
Two-thirds of GOP voters (67%) and a plurality (49%) of unaffiliateds say a nominee's legal background is more important than ensuring a diverse court. But 49% of Democratic voters think the priority for picking a nominee should be ensuring a court that is as diverse as American society.
Sixty-five percent (65%) of conservative voters put the emphasis on legal background. Liberals and moderates are almost evenly divided on the issue.
Being a member of the Supreme Court, however, does not necessarily mean that voters know who you are. Obama's next nominee will replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, who turns 90 tomorrow and is the court's oldest serving member. But 35% of voters don't know enough about Stevens to express any kind of opinion of him.
Thirty-four percent (34%) have a favorable view of Stevens who was named to the court by President Gerald Ford in 1975, while 31% view him unfavorably. This includes 12% very favorable and 10% very unfavorable.
Voters aware of Stevens also are familiar with his reputation as a reliably liberal vote on the Supreme Court. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of liberals view the retiring justice favorably, while 51% of conservatives have an unfavorable opinion of him.
Better known is Obama's first high court choice, Sonia Sotomayor, who after Senate confirmation hearings last summer joined the court in August. Forty-three percent (43%) view her favorably, with 16% who have a very favorable opinion. Forty-two percent (42%) have an unfavorable view of Sotomayor, including 18% very unfavorable. Only 16%, though, are not sure what they think of her.
These findings are little changed from late July in the final survey Rasmussen Reports took just before the Senate voted to confirm her nomination.