Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Thinking about Government Authority: Constitutional Rules and Political Context in Citizens’ Assessments of Judicial, Legislative, and Executive Action

Thinking about Government Authority: Constitutional Rules and Political Context in Citizens’... This study explores how citizens think about the appropriate exercise of authority across the branches of government. Three similarly designed experiments conducted on national samples reveal that what individuals are told about compliance with decision‐making rules matters across institutions, but so does the political context in which officials are acting. Participants’ policy preferences about the issues that are the subject of government action are particularly important in such assessments. Evidence suggests that feelings about President Trump and participants’ policy views are more important in assessments of the appropriateness of unilateral action than they were during the Obama administration; findings also suggest that what participants are told about President Trump's compliance with rules is less important. This could reflect an erosion in the importance of constitutional norms in citizens’ assessments of executive authority, but other explanations specific to the inquiry are also discussed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Political Science Wiley

Thinking about Government Authority: Constitutional Rules and Political Context in Citizens’ Assessments of Judicial, Legislative, and Executive Action

American Journal of Political Science , Volume 65 (2) – Apr 1, 2021

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/thinking-about-government-authority-constitutional-rules-and-political-SSux8Q9EIz
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© 2021 by the Midwest Political Science Association
ISSN
0092-5853
eISSN
1540-5907
DOI
10.1111/ajps.12582
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This study explores how citizens think about the appropriate exercise of authority across the branches of government. Three similarly designed experiments conducted on national samples reveal that what individuals are told about compliance with decision‐making rules matters across institutions, but so does the political context in which officials are acting. Participants’ policy preferences about the issues that are the subject of government action are particularly important in such assessments. Evidence suggests that feelings about President Trump and participants’ policy views are more important in assessments of the appropriateness of unilateral action than they were during the Obama administration; findings also suggest that what participants are told about President Trump's compliance with rules is less important. This could reflect an erosion in the importance of constitutional norms in citizens’ assessments of executive authority, but other explanations specific to the inquiry are also discussed.

Journal

American Journal of Political ScienceWiley

Published: Apr 1, 2021

References