A recent YouGov poll, conducted in early May, indicates that 38% of Americans approve of how the Supreme Court is performing, while 45% disapprove. That yields a net disapproval of -7, which might not strike some as particularly striking. Yet it is considerably more favorable than the ratings of the other two branches of government. In contemporary surveys, an average of 58% disapprove of Donald Trump, compared to 38% who disapprove of the Court. Congress’ approval level remains markedly lower.
The Court’s current standing also represents a modest uptick from polls taken in mid to late 2025. At that time, an Economist/YouGov poll recorded a net -16 disapproval (51-35), Gallup showed -10 (52-42), and Quinnipiac registered -13 (53-40). To be fair, a YouGov poll from July 2025 yielded nearly identical results to the latest poll (45% disapprove, 40% approve), though it now appears to have been an outlier.
Part of the improvement in the Court’s standing may be related to the recent tariff decision (a case I helped litigate). The May YouGov poll found 58% approving of the outcome, while 25% disapproved. An earlier YouGov poll, conducted immediately after the ruling, found 60% approving and 23% disapproving. Consequently, I may have contributed to nudging the Supreme Court toward a somewhat more favorable public perception (or, at least, less unfavorable). I suspect I will not be invited to all the fashionable SCOTUS holiday gatherings this year (okay, probably not…).
Before proceeding, it is important to stress that public opinion is a poor barometer of the quality of the Court’s decisions. Survey data show that most Americans know very little about the Constitution and the Court’s work, and a majority cannot even name one Supreme Court justice. Likewise, I do not claim that broad public backing for the tariff ruling proves the justices were right (although I do believe they were, for other reasons). Ideally, the justices should not be guided by public opinion. Shielding them from it is one of the reasons they enjoy life tenure.
But, as I have noted previously, public opinion about the Court does matter in some respects. A highly unpopular Court is more vulnerable to measures to curb or even destroy its authority, such as court-packing. And the Court can more easily strike down major policy initiatives of the president and other political leaders if it knows doing so will enjoy substantial public support. If the Court becomes sufficiently unpopular, politicians could potentially defy its rulings with little fear of political consequences. Thus, while it is unlikely the tariff case was decided solely because tariffs are unpopular, that unpopularity may have facilitated the justices’ decision to overturn one of Donald Trump’s signature policy initiatives.
For these and other reasons, the Court’s level of public approval can matter. That remains true even though the public’s assessment of the Court’s work tells us little about whether the justices are actually performing well. Indeed, if the Court were to become immensely popular, I would worry that they were not doing enough to protect the rights of unpopular minorities.
In addition to the Court’s overall approval rating and the tariff question, the YouGov survey yields several other intriguing findings. They also produced approval ratings for each individual justice:
< figure id="attachment_8285699" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-8285699" style="width: 300px" class="wp-caption alignnone">
A recent YouGov poll, conducted in early May, indicates that 38% of Americans approve of the Court’s performance, while 45% disapprove. That results in a net disapproval of -7, which might not strike some as particularly striking. Yet it is considerably more favorable than the ratings of the other two branches of government. In contemporary surveys, an average of 58% disapprove of Donald Trump, compared to 38% who disapprove of the Court. Congress’ approval level remains markedly lower.
The Court’s current standing also represents a modest uptick from polls taken in mid to late 2025. At that time, an Economist/YouGov poll recorded a net -16 disapproval (51-35), Gallup showed -10 (52-42), and Quinnipiac registered -13 (53-40). To be fair, a YouGov poll from July 2025 yielded nearly identical results to the latest poll (45% disapprove, 40% approve), though it now appears to have been an outlier.
Part of the improvement in the Court’s standing may be related to the recent tariff decision (a case I helped litigate). The May YouGov poll found 58% approving of the outcome, while 25% disapproved. An earlier YouGov poll, conducted immediately after the ruling, found 60% approving and 23% disapproving. Consequently, I may have contributed to nudging the Supreme Court toward a somewhat more favorable public perception (or, at least, less unfavorable). I suspect I will not be invited to all the fashionable SCOTUS holiday gatherings this year (okay, probably not…).
Before proceeding, it is important to stress that public opinion is a poor barometer of the quality of the Court’s decisions. Survey data show that most Americans know very little about the Constitution and the Court’s work, and a majority cannot even name one Supreme Court justice. Likewise, I do not claim that broad public backing for the tariff ruling proves the justices were right (although I do believe they were, for other reasons). Ideally, the justices should not be guided by public opinion. Shielding them from it is one of the reasons they enjoy life tenure.
But, as I have noted earlier, public opinion about the Court does matter in certain respects. A highly unpopular Court is more vulnerable to measures to curb or even destroy its authority, such as court-packing. And the Court can more easily strike down major policy initiatives of the president and other political leaders if it knows doing so will enjoy substantial public support. If the Court becomes sufficiently unpopular, politicians could potentially defy its rulings with little fear of political consequences. Thus, while it is unlikely the Court decided the tariff case as it did solely because tariffs are unpopular, that unpopularity may have facilitated the justices’ decision to overturn one of Donald Trump’s signature policy initiatives.
For these and other reasons, the Court’s degree of public approval can matter. That’s true even though the public’s assessment of the Court’s work says little about whether the justices are actually doing a good job or not. Indeed, if the Court were to become immensely popular, I would worry they weren’t doing enough to protect the rights of unpopular minorities.
In addition to the Court’s overall approval rating and the question about tariffs, the YouGov survey has several other interesting results. They also did approval ratings for all the individual justices:
Interestingly, the three liberal justices seem to have the highest approval ratings. All three have net positive ratings, while all six conservatives are net negative. But I would not give too much credence to these numbers. As noted above, most Americans cannot even name a Supreme Court justice, and many of those giving opinions in the YouGov survey probably know little or nothing about the justices in question. Even as it stands, for each of the justices 33% or more said they had no opinion, except Clarence Thomas (about whom only 27% had no opinion).
In addition to the tariff case, YouGov also asked respondents whether the Court should overturn Obergefell v. Hodges (the 2015 ruling striking down state laws banning same-sex marriage); 51% of respondents said “no” and only 24% said “yes.” They similarly asked about the birthright citizenship case currently before the Court, on which issue 53% said the Court could ruled that “[a]ll children born in the U.S. should automatically become
citizens,” while 39% wanted it to rule that “[o]nly those children born in the U.S. whose parents are citizens or lawful permanent residents should automatically become citizens.”
As with the tariff case, I agree with majority public opinion on both of these issues. I have argued the Court should rule against Trump in the birthright citizenship case, and that Obergefell v. Hodges is a landmark civil rights decision, even though its reasoning should have been better. It all goes to show I am a true Man of the People! OK, maybe not… In reality, I hold all kinds of unpopular views. And I think majority public opinion is often highly ignorant and influenced by bias.
On a slightly more serious note, Obergefell’s strong popularity is one of the reasons why I think it is unlikely to be overruled. And the unpopularity of Trump’s position on birthright citizenship is one reason why the Court probably won’t hesitate to rule against him on this issue if a majority of justices believe he’s wrong (as seemed likely, though not certain, to be the case after oral argument).
In sum, the public’s view of the Court is only modestly negative, and much less so than its view of the president and Congress. That’s hardly a rousing endorsement. But it’s a lot better than the other two branches of government, and that difference may provide some protection against political attacks on judicial independence.
