Teachers from 20 states gathered in Philadelphia to discuss the First Amendment at a summer institute sponsored by the Rendell Center for Civics and Civic Engagement.
Judiciary
Civics Knowledge Predicts Willingness to Protect Supreme Court
The annual Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey found that Americans are familiar with constitutional provisions on pardons and impeachment but know less about fundamentals like the three branches of government.
Justices Scalia and Breyer Talk About Interpreting the Constitution
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was an originalist in his approach to the Constitution. In a 2008 video for Annenberg Classroom, he and Justice Stephen G. Breyer discussed theories of interpreting the Constitution.
Rendell Center and APPC to Collaborate on Civic Education
The Rendell Center for Civics and Civic Engagement celebrated its relocation to the Annenberg Public Policy Center on May 4, in events that showcased their joint interest in civic education and judicial independence. The Rendell Center also sponsored a youth mayoral forum where 4th and 5th graders could question Philadelphia's mayoral candidates.
Annenberg political communication scholars published in Political Research Quarterly
James L. Gibson (Washington University in St. Louis, Mo.), Annenberg doctoral student Jeffrey A. Gottfried, Annenberg Dean Michael X. Delli Carpini, Ph.D., and APPC Director Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Ph.D., co-authored an article, "The Effects of Judicial Campaign Activity on the Legitimacy of Courts: A Survey-based Experiment," that appears in the September 2011 issue of Political
Partisan Judicial Elections Foster Cynicism and Distrust
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Americans who live in states that hold partisan judicial elections are more cynical toward the courts than Americans who live in states that do not hold partisan elections. Partisan judicial elections foster the belief that “judges are just politicians in robes.” Partisan judicial elections also decrease public trust that state courts are
Judicial Campaigns: Money, Mudslinging and an Erosion of Public Trust
Thirty-nine states elect their judges in some fashion. What once were “sleepy little affairs,” judicial campaigns have become high-stakes races, drawing in big money and increasingly negative advertising campaigns. In 2006, an estimated $16 million was spent on advertising in supreme court races in 10 states, a record. If predictions hold true, contests in 2008
Americans overwhelmingly favor election of judges but disapprove of judicial campaign fund-raising, fearing it affects fairness
Nearly two-thirds, 65 percent, of Americans prefer electing their judges rather than having governors nominate them from a list prepared by a nonpartisan committee. Yet when judges run for office they usually have to raise money for their election campaigns. Seven in 10 Americans believe that the necessity to raise campaign funds will affect a