{"id":559,"date":"2020-10-20T17:40:23","date_gmt":"2020-10-20T21:40:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/?page_id=559"},"modified":"2025-05-12T11:11:50","modified_gmt":"2025-05-12T15:11:50","slug":"considering-legitimacy","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/in-print-2\/volume-18-number-2-summer-2020\/considering-legitimacy\/","title":{"rendered":"Considering Legitimacy"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"p2\">This Article on Richard Fallon\u2019s Law and Legitimacy in the Supreme Court focuses on public acceptance of the Supreme Court\u2019s authority, what Fallon calls sociological legitimacy. After setting out Fallon\u2019s accounts of legitimacy and constitutional argumentation, the Article looks at public opinion data and political science scholarship on the extent to which the Court\u2019s decisions affect public acceptance of the Court. It then turns to the normative question of whether, even if the Court\u2019s decisions may undermine its sociological legitimacy, that impact is a legally legitimate factor for the Court to consider. The Article argues that strategic consideration of the Court\u2019s public legitimacy can be an appropriate factor in the Justices\u2019 decision making, but such consideration may end up actually harming the Court\u2019s reputation if undertaken openly and candidly as Fallon would seem to require.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/23\/2020\/10\/Considering-Legitmacy-18-2.pdf\">Keep Reading: Considering Legitimacy<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This Article on Richard Fallon\u2019s Law and Legitimacy in the Supreme Court focuses on public acceptance of the Supreme Court\u2019s authority, what Fallon calls sociological legitimacy. After setting out Fallon\u2019s [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1553,"featured_media":0,"parent":508,"menu_order":5,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"abstract.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"footnotes":"","_tec_slr_enabled":"","_tec_slr_layout":""},"class_list":["post-559","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"ticketed":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/559","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1553"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=559"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/559\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":594,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/559\/revisions\/594"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/508"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/public-policy-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=559"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}