To what extent do citizens safeguard judicial independence? In backsliding democracies, governments often curtail judicial independence for their own executive gains. Citizens confronted with such actions can choose to protest these activities or lend support to a government that may align with their preferences but pursues non-democratic reform efforts. We conducted discrete choice experiments in nine European countries to untangle the trade-off and elicit citizens' reactions to non-democratic reform proposals. Our findings show that respondents in all countries demonstrate some credible commitment to the democratic principle of an independent judiciary. However, the cross-country comparison reveals that increasing polarization and potential distrust in courts will subject the democratic principle to a stress test. The implications of these findings extend beyond individual countries. The insights gained from this study highlight the need to address polarization and foster trust in courts to ensure the enduring strength and resilience of democratic governance.
