In 1987, 17% of people had an unfavorable view of the Supreme Court. Now, in 2024, 51% of people say the same thing. That’s a 200% increase in just 37 years, according to analysis of Pew Research data. So why have American's opinions of the court's declined so significantly? In this episode, new co-host Jordyn Reiland chats with Assistant Professor Phil Chen about how trust and legitimacy in the Supreme Court and federal judiciary more broadly is contingent on more than just descriptive representation—otherwise known as demographic diversity. Americans also want to see substantive representation, effectively whether your specific policy interests are being met. Phil Chen is an assistant professor of political science in the College of Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences. His research delves into race, ethnicity, gender, and partisanship in political psychology, as well as political communication and how voters interpret and react to appeals from politicians and the media. Chen teaches classes on campaigns and elections, race and ethnicity, political polarization, media and politics, political psychology, and political participation.More information:Amy Coney Barrett is Not Enough: How Descriptive and Substantive Representation Shape Trust and Legitimacy of the Federal Courts (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10659129241262340) by Phil Chen and Amanda SavageFavorable views of Supreme Court remain near historic low (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/08/favorable-views-of-supreme-court-remain-near-historic-low/)Most of Biden’s appointed judges to date are women, racial or ethnic minorities – a first for any president (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/12/04/most-of-bidens-appointed-judges-to-date-are-women-racial-or-ethnic-minorities-a-first-for-any-president/)