Abstract：
Previous research focused on popular US Supreme Court rulings expanding rights; however, less is known about rulings running against prevailing public opinion and restricting rights. We examine the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women\'s Health Organization opinion, which overturned Roe v. Wade\'s (1973) constitutional protection of abortion rights. A three-wave survey panel (5,489 interviews) conducted before the leak of the drafted Dobbs opinion, after the leak, and after the official opinion release, and cross-sectional data from these three time points (10,107 interviews) show that the ruling directly influenced views about the constitutional legality of abortion and fetal viability. However, personal opinions were not directly influenced and perceived social norms shifted away from the ruling, meaning that individuals perceived greater public support for abortion. We argue that extensive coverage of opposition to overturning Roe v. Wade supported this shift. Dobbs v. Jackson Women\'s Health Organization also caused large changes, polarized by party identification, in opinions about the Supreme Court.
摘要：
以前的研究集中在流行的美国最高法院的裁决扩大权利;然而，对反对普遍舆论和限制权利的裁决知之甚少。我们研究了多布斯诉杰克逊妇女卫生组织意见的影响，这推翻了罗伊诉韦德案(1973年)对堕胎权的宪法保护。在起草的多布斯意见泄漏之前进行了三波调查小组（5,489次采访），泄漏后，在官方意见发布后，和来自这三个时间点的横截面数据（10,107次访谈）表明，该裁决直接影响了有关堕胎和胎儿生存能力的宪法合法性的观点。然而,个人意见没有受到直接影响，感知的社会规范也偏离了裁决，这意味着个人认为公众对堕胎的支持更大。我们认为，反对推翻Roev.Wade的广泛报道支持了这一转变。多布斯诉杰克逊妇女卫生组织案也引起了很大的变化，由于政党认同而两极分化，关于最高法院的意见。
