000			01463nam a2200181Ia 4500
008			181130s2018 xx 000 0 und d
100			_aWedeking, Justin
245			_aDisagreeable rhetoric and the prospect of public opposition: _bopinion moderation on the U.S. Supreme Court
260			_c2018
300			_ap.380-394.
504			_dJun
520			_aElite rhetoric is an important aspect of democracy, and understanding why elites alter their rhetorical tone is vital to understanding the nature of public�elite interaction. In this paper, we identify the conditions under which insulated elites respond to public opinion by changing the amount of disagreeable rhetoric they emphasize. We examine Supreme Court opinions and theorize that the majority limits the use of disagreeable rhetoric�language with harsh, unpleasant, or negative connotations�in salient cases with the intention of dulling public opposition to rulings. We test our expectations on two levels, the first using a broad measure of public mood on a large sample of cases and the second using a small sample with issue-specific public opinion measures. We find that as public opinion diverges from the Court, the majority tones down its disagreeable rhetoric, but only in salient cases. - Reproduced.
650			_aPublic opinion
650			_aSupreme Court - U.S.A.
700			_aZilis, Michael A.
773			_aPolitical Research Quarterly
906			_aSupreme Court - U.S.A.
999			_c506829 _d506829