Hibbing and Theiss-Morse (1995. 158, 161) present legislatures as "easily the most vulnerable instatution[s]" because of the public's "lack of appreciation for the messiness inherent in democratic processes." Their finding, along with the evidence of the popularity of national high courts, implies that one possible source of support for courts might emanate from something particular about judicial procedures. However, empirical support for the idea that procedural justice leads to judicial legitimacy has been mixed. This article tests two alternative hypotheses: (1) the perception that judicial procedures are fair leads to support for courts, and (2) the perception that judicial procedures should be legalistic leads to support for courts. Findings hint that judiciaries might be more popular than legislatures because over time, those who support legalistic processes do nor expect to be satisfied with the substance of judicial rulings, and therefore, their support does not diminish in the face of disappointment.