The U.S. Supreme Court concluded a contentious term by the end of June amid heightened partisan tensions. Following this, Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan testified to Congress about the need for improved judiciary security. Justices are concerned about how media framing affects public perceptions of their decisions, not only due to safety risks. Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized in his 2024 report that courts are “ill-suited” to counter misinformation, as judges speak primarily through their rulings and do not engage in proactive media interactions.
Outside of its decisions, the Supreme Court engages the public via live audio of oral arguments, available since 2020 during its October-June term. In 2022, C-SPAN monitored public perceptions of the Court’s favorability, awareness, interest, and live audio usage. Our findings in 2026 show increased awareness from 46% in 2022 to 55%, driven by Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z. Boomers and those over 80 make up a third of likely voters, but their awareness remains stagnant at 39% today compared to 37% in 2022.
Members of Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z enjoy live audio, with figures like John Mulaney, 43, referring to themselves as “Supreme Court argument nerds.” This demographic prefers getting court news from social media (75%), where audio of arguments is popular, unlike older voters who primarily rely on traditional news media (70%). Among Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z who have heard live audio, 58% say it enhances their view of the Court. Meanwhile, only 27% of Boomers share this sentiment.
Live audio increases trust over time, with findings reaffirming that it enhances court views primarily among younger voters accessing it through digital media. Though digital platforms often spread misleading content, they also provide the public broader access to the Supreme Court’s discourse. Examples include justice questions in arguments, lawyer-justice dialogues, or social media clips highlighting justices’ insights on cases.
Conversely, traditional media often filters court coverage through journalists, experts, or commentators’ opinions. A comparison reveals younger generations rate Supreme Court live audio more favorably than older voters still tied to traditional media. Over time, direct access to justices’ dialogues helps the public view the Court’s work positively, even amid disagreements.
This positive shift highlights the potential impact of introducing courtroom cameras. Televised oral arguments, like live audio, would showcase the justices’ dedication and potentially enhance public trust, even among those who may disagree with some rulings. Importantly, live video could broaden available perspectives on the Court and counteract partisan misinformation.
Robert Green is principal and Ian Green is vice president at Pierrepont Consulting and Analytics.