Voters Oppose Judge or Court Shopping

By Kevin Hanley

Questions over the legal practice of steering cases to sympathetic judges or courts, commonly called judge or court shopping, have sparked fierce debate in recent weeks. Conservative groups, Republican attorneys general, and corporate interests often aim to bring cases before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, the most conservative federal appeals court in the nation.

Recent polling from Data for Progress identifies that a strong majority of voters across party lines oppose this practice, and furthermore illustrates that a majority of voters do not view criticisms of the judiciary or judges in particular as threatening to the rule of law.

After being presented with a brief description of judge or court shopping, 73% of likely voters say that judge or court shopping should not be an accepted practice in the United States legal system. Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike respond similarly to this question, while young voters are slightly more accepting of judge or court shopping (30% say it should be an accepted practice).

 
 

Around three-quarters of respondents (74%) say that the practice of judge or court shopping threatens the rule of law in a binary ask. Conversely, a majority (57%) of voters do not view criticisms of judges or the judiciary as threatening to the rule of law. These findings are remarkably stable across partisanship, with similar numbers of Democrats and Republicans reporting these views on both questions.

 
 

Overall, these results paint a clear picture of the public's bipartisan view that judge or court shopping should not be an accepted practice in the United States. Criticisms of judges or the judiciary in general are not seen as threats to the rule of law, while the practice of judge or court shopping certainly is.


Kevin Hanley (@khanley.bsky.social) is a senior analyst at Data for Progress.

Survey Methodology

From December 12 to 13, 2024, Data for Progress conducted a survey of 1,424 U.S. likely voters nationally using web panel respondents. The sample was weighted to be representative of likely voters by age, gender, education, race, geography, and recalled presidential vote. The survey was conducted in English. The margin of error associated with the sample size is ±3 percentage points. Results for subgroups of the sample are subject to increased margins of error. Partisanship reflected in tabulations is based on self-identified party affiliation, not partisan registration. For more information please visit dataforprogress.org/our-methodology.

Lew Blankjustice, Democracy, Judiciary