Public Opinion Of US Supreme Court Deteriorates Following Obamacare Decision

Tyler Durden's picture

While we are still collecting various public polling results showing popular sentiment in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's surprising Obamacare ruling last week, the first results out of Rasmussen show that if Judge John Roberts' goal was to somehow restory credibility in the supreme judicial entity, following his alleged flip flopping on the ACA, whereby he passed the Individual Mandate in a format never intended by the Obama administration, he has failed. From Rasmussen: "A week ago, 36% said the court was doing a good or an excellent job. That’s down to 33% today. However, the big change is a rise in negative perceptions. Today, 28% say the Supreme Court is doing a poor job. That’s up 11 points over the past week."


Public opinion of the Supreme Court has grown more negative since the highly publicized ruling on the president’s health care law was released. A growing number now believe that the high court is too liberal and that justices pursue their own agenda rather than acting impartially.


A week ago, 36% said the court was doing a good or an excellent job. That’s down to 33% today. However, the big change is a rise in negative perceptions. Today, 28% say the Supreme Court is doing a poor job. That’s up 11 points over the past week.


The new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted on Friday and Saturday following the court ruling, finds that 56% believe justices pursue their own political agenda rather than generally remain impartial. That’s up five points from a week ago. Just half as many -- 27% -- believe the justices remain impartial. (To see survey question wording, click here.)


Thirty-seven percent (37%) now believe the Supreme Court is too liberal, while 22% think it's too conservative. A week ago, public opinion was much more evenly divided:  32% said it was too liberal and 25% said too conservative.


In the latest survey, 31% now believe the balance is about right.

Not surprisingly, the SCOTUS is merely the latest entity to fall cleanly into the political class divide, showing that when ideology is concerned, Justice is certainly not blind:

A week ago, Republicans were generally positive about the court. Forty-two percent (42%) of GOP voters gave the justices good or excellent marks, while 14% said poor. Now, the numbers are strongly negative — 20% say good or excellent and 43% say poor.


Among Democrats, the numbers went from mixed to very positive. A week ago, 35% of those in the president’s party gave the high court positive reviews and 22% offered a negative assessment. Now, 50% are positive and only 11% give the high court negative marks.


As for those not affiliated with either major party, the positives remained unchanged at 31%. However, among unaffiliated voters, the number rating the court's performance as poor doubled from 14% a week ago to 30% today.


Among Political Class voters, positive ratings for the Supreme Court soared to 55%, compared to 27% a week ago.


Among Mainstream voters, the court’s ratings headed in the opposite direction. A week ago, 34% of Mainstream voters said the court was doing a good or excellent job and 17% gave it poor ratings. The numbers have now reversed — 22% positive and 36% negative.


Democrats are now fairly evenly divided as to whether justices pursue their own agenda or remain impartial. However, by lopsided margins, Republicans and unaffiliated voters believe that they pursue their own agenda.

Next up it is Germany's constitutional court to confirm that when it comes to preserving the status quo, impartial and objective ethics and values, not to mention laws and mores, are irrelevant. The only problem, there and here, is the one day at a time, taking liberty with the heretofore endless supplies of other people's money, which allowed everyone to keep a blind eye to the government's encroaching take over of all seemingly impartial institutions, is slowly ending, as the above mentioned "enablement" money is now practically gone.

And no amount of "collateral expansions" by the ECB or other central banks can fix this realization at the heart of all modern-day problems.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Yes_Questions's picture



Public Opinion Of US Supreme Court Deteriorates Following Obamacare Decision.  A long slide of decline since Bush V. Gore highlighted along the way with Citizens United V. FEC.



Jay Gould Esq.'s picture

"Public opinion ?" Inconsequential.

J. Glover Roberts Jr. is now the toast of the Beltway cocktail party circuit, which is of much more "professional" import.

El Viejo's picture

Extra, Extra:  It's unanimous. All three branches of govt now support big business over personal freedoms!

Tirpitz's picture

But that's very understandable: There's more than 300 million of us suggers, expendables, cannon fodder, while the personhood-corporations reach numbers only in the thousands, and thus need the extra protection of bought law, over-reaching over-regulation, and state-guaranteed, state-supported monopolies to operate in.

DeadFred's picture

The primary respect the three branches get now comes from their monopoly on the use of force. Do what they say or else they will shoot you or stuff you in a cage.

I'm somewhat embarrassed to say I really expected more of them. One more notch up on the jaded scale.

narapoiddyslexia's picture

From what I've read of the man, Roberts couldn't care less what we think about him. His intended audience hasn't yet been born.

GetZeeGold's picture



Turns out the hooker was a whore....didn't see that coming.


Wonder what the dollar amount was? I'm gonna say at least seven zeros.


IAmNotMark's picture

Extra, Extra: It's unanimous. All three branches of govt now support big government over personal freedoms!

There.  Fixed it for you.

Manthong's picture

All of the veils are down now.

Yes_Questions's picture






Future Jim's picture

The shroud of the dark side has fallen. Impossible to see the future is.

GOSPLAN HERO's picture

It is the America Abe Lincoln wanted.

... Federal power uber alles!

... the states are just bill payers.

... obey me or I'll kill you.


Mr. Fix's picture

@I am not Mark:

That needed to be fixed,

You beat me to it.

CatoRenasci's picture

As the Brits used to say, Roberts "ratted".


Oh, somewhere in this favored world the sun is shining bright;
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout;
But there is no joy in America - mighty Roberts has sold out.


(apologies to Ernest Lawrence Thayer)

bobnoxy's picture

Oh please! If the court had struck down Obamacare, you, Sarah Retard Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity and your other opinion setters would be hailing them as beacons of freedom and everything that's still right about America.

It's just when they do something you...excuse me, they don't like, which always means bad for their corporate sponsors, then you get all upset. When they do something the hard right doesn't like, they're activist judges.

When they do something the radical right agrees with, they're true constructionists and heroes, as Roberts was consitently hailed as until last week.

Get a grip. Sometimes democracy doesn't go our way. You don't get to pull it all down when one goes against your mal-informed opinions.

Silver Bully's picture

Wow, nice partisan bomb-throwing. You'll fit right in on Drudge or Huffpo.

However, this is ZH.

Last I checked, no one HERE is suggesting democracy is going anyone's way, except for the parasites in the Eccles building and Wall St. Most people here don't buy into the 'vote for the lesser of 2 evils' system. Obamacare is a product of that system. If you think anyone HERE also wants to replace our republic with a theocracy, you need to go back to Huffpo where you belong. There's nothing liberal or conservative about it, it is a pure unconstitutional power grab.

blunderdog's picture

It's repeated a lot around here, but it isn't true.  There's a strong Republican leaning on the ZH forums. 

Perhaps it's because the 'Pub-lovers are the loudest and most apt to junk their opponents, but you can't read these comments here for more than a few days without realizing that any "Democrat-positive" message will be beat down like Rodney King while the "Republican-positive" messages are more often left alone.

It may be that the Dem-lovers just don't want to post on boards populated by our resident neo-Nazis and John Birchers.

Or maybe many of the residents are actually stupid enough to believe the Republicans are more "libertarian" than the Democrats.

Whatever.  If Bobnoxy's a partisan, he won't be around long.

Bollixed's picture

Perhaps you're reading your own biases into the responses. What I see is a general distain for persons/entities who think they are entitled to OPM as a god given mandate to 'save' others from themselves. In other words, to userp the power of the individual in favor of the status quo, whether that be big government or big business.

Personally I think it's a toss up between the Dems and Repubs as to which party has more shit for brains.

The fact that a person such as Ron Paul wears a Republican hat is certainly cause to make the case that at least some of the Repubs hold at least a sliver of belief in personal responsibility vs the overwhelming nanny state attitudes held by socialists who predominantly see themselves as Dems.

For the record I see both parties has having very little differences and consider them two sides of the same coin. Additionally, buying into the belief that we have two parties that oppose each other is pure nonsense in my book.

They both want the same thing...MORE power for them, and LESS power for the individual. My personal belief is that the more power individuals have the less misallocation of money, resources, and energy we'll see. I don't see either puppet party espousing that view.

lakecity55's picture

I think most of us here either work or want to work to be productive. That does not entitle someone to take our stuff at (IRS) gunpoint.

Goner's picture

<--- Supports the Smaller Gov, less taxes, true free market (Republican Platform but NOT the Republican Party)

<--- Support the Republican party

There might be people who lean towards some of the Republican ideals (you know, smaller Government, less taxes, a TRUE free market) But since the Republican party only gives those ideals lip service you cant label those ZH'ers as supporting the Republican Party.

But maybe I am wrong and just projecting my thoughts on the collective

dougngen's picture

the truth is the truth.....

Democrat= idealist

Conservative= realist

You can't solve world hunger or medical coverage with other peoples money. It's a nice dream, but ZH'rs understand the reality of the situation.

So if we sound conservative I.e. repub.... it's because the truth lives here.

Call us Libertarian

Galactic Superwave's picture

Gee, I wonder what news outlet you listen to....the "unbiased" Fox News.

Think about the root emotion in the word Conservative. It is Fear. Conservatives are fearful people.

The "truth" is that -almost- everyone forms their opinions on things they see or hear that feeds their own Self Interest. It's the rare individual that can see the "truth" in the shared helping of others who are less fortunate. Granted, many of the less fortunate made poor choices to get in their situation but many did not.


nmewn's picture

"It's the rare individual that can see the "truth" in the shared helping of others who are less fortunate."

Oh, how

I pulled up at an interstate off ramp the other day and there was some guy (in his twenties and obviously healthy, it was very hot) standing there with a cardboard sign...Stranded, Hungry. Please Help. Thank You.

I carry a can of peas around with me for just these occasions, I rolled down the window and said here ya go friend...I got a blank stare.

He was a "conservative" no all he cared about was my money, not my offer of charity ;-)

mjk0259's picture

I guess you only need one can as it comes back through your rear window

nmewn's picture

Never had that problem...they always turn it down.

Gonna have to "invest" in another can of peas though, the label is getting a little faded & torn...maybe thats the problem...they're stranded, starving and begging...but still have their dignity ;-)


For those who didn't get the point of my little morality about this beggar preying on peoples emotion...based entirely on a lie?

He isn't starving, he rejected food.

He's also healthy, young, completely shameless and clearly only wants money he has not earned.

jumbo maverick's picture

How's yous axpect me to cook dees heer peees theys all raws and shit motherfucker.

nmewn's picture

"...without realizing that any "Democrat-positive" message..."

What is a democrat positive message anyways?

Is that like...pssst, hey you'ze, over here. You wanna maybe get in on da ground floor of some pump & dump solar stocks? Da sucka's will be comin in by da tousands, you buy now, you dump lata...capice? Ya in or what?

Or is it more of a tax & spend sorta thing like its always been, with a "shovel ready" chaser these days ;-)

Freddie's picture

Dems and Repubs suck but it was Obama and Holder that pushed Fast and Furious with the goal of ending the Second Amnedment.  Not one Democrat has said a peep.  They all back Obama and Holder.

The Repubs suck but all the Democrats support Obama.  Name one Democrat that is remotely like Ron or Rand Paul. 

lakecity55's picture

We have a Republic. Not democracy.

dbomb12's picture

Maybe during the 1800, s but not anymore

max2205's picture

Bad is good when reading through 1%'ers glasses

lakecity55's picture

Cloward-Piven. Crash the entire economy thru impossible demands, establish New Communist State.

dbomb12's picture

That is part of the plan, the other is to discredit all branchs of Government

The communist agenda, Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .

#29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
#30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
F. Bastiat's picture

It seems clear that John Roberts sacrificed his oath for political expediency.

Temporalist's picture

He sacrificed the constitution and the American people to corporate interests.

F. Bastiat's picture

And which "corporate" interests are those?'s picture

Those who will profit from government mandated "healthcare," of course.

LowProfile's picture


Just go see which healthcare stocks soared after the supreme deciders decided.

Harbanger's picture

If a law forces every person in the Country to buy a product what do you expect the stock to do( in the short term)?  Don't you know the timeline and particulars of the Law?  The 1st thing to go will be employer provided health plans because it's cheaper to pay the fine.   By design, the specifics in the Obamacare law are going to make it impossible for any private sector health insurance company to stay in business.  It all shifts to Govt. in a few years and you can have your Utopian dream of banana Republic free HC.

Miffed Microbiologist's picture

Absolutely by design! They couldn't get single payer the first time around so they created a situation where it is inevitable. God these assholes make me sick and people are so blind to it. People at my work were cheering when the ruling went down. They deserve their fate but I'm going to suffer as well. Truth doesn't always sit you free.


LowProfile's picture

Go to cash.  Buy gold, food, and enough guns to keep them at bay.

You may not suffer as much as you think.

bigkahuna's picture

Yep, single payer is on the way. The "regulated" plan will cause a crisis that will bring in healthcare from big brother and only big brother. 

I guess you can hope you don't get sick.

tmosley's picture

When a plot that is too complex to understand is carried out, the best way to tell who was behind it is to assume it went according to plan, then look at who benefited.

The government won't be providing health insurance directly.  They will contract with 1-5 large companies, and throw the rest under the bus, in typical fascist fashion.

F. Bastiat's picture

Occam's razor and spontaneous economic order beg to differ.  But of course you somehow magically know better than three hundred years of experience.

Bob's picture

My 30 second search:

Hospital operators, and companies that own hospitals, celebrated the ruling. HCA Holdings (HCA, Fortune 500), United Health Services (UHS, Fortune 500), Community Health Systems (CYH, Fortune 500), Health Management Associates (HMA, Fortune 500) and Tenet Healthcare Corp (THC, Fortune 500) surged between 5% to 10%.

Providers of Medicare and Medicaid also got a substantial lift. Wellcare Health Plans (WCG, Fortune 500) rose 9% and Amerigroup (AGP, Fortune 500) jumped 5%. Centene Corp. (CNC, Fortune 500) rose 2% and Molina Healthcare (MOH, Fortune 500) rose 9%.

F. Bastiat's picture

So you're claiming that John Roberts is somehow magically beholden to the people making up the organizations you've listed above.  What evidence can you provide in support of your assertations?

LowProfile's picture

LOL, demand answers to things you can easily look up yourself, change the subject, create a straw man for beating (thanks duncangraper) and then demand incontrovertible proof..!

You understand you're a rancid fucking statist cunt tool, right?  And a shitty one at that?


duncangraper's picture

Seems like you claimed a magical connection when confronted with who benefited explicitally form the ruling.  At least try to straw man with a little more deftness