Digital opinion polarization in relation to Indonesia’s Constitutional Court’s decision regarding age limits for vice-presidential candidates represents an important issue for democratic legitimacy in digitally revitalised countries. This research assesses how sentiments on platform X (formerly Twitter) became emotionally charged clusters after the Court’s decision and implications for trust in law. Using a descriptive‐qualitative framework, we gathered 14,310 tweets through purposive sampling of hashtags, analysed using inductive thematic coding and NVivo, and triangulated findings with sentiment and social‐network analysis from Drone Emprit. We found that just over 60 % of the discourse was polarizing and negative, suggesting the ruling an encroachment by the executive, 29 % marginally positively suggested the ruling was an opportunity for youth leadership, and 11 % had neutral sentiment. The visualized network showed narrow echo chambers supporting the amplification of affective narratives and diminishing deliberation across camps on public social media. This study employs the Digital Movement of Opinion framework and political-communication theory to analyse how legal controversies in the Global South can create rapid, polarization cycles of opinion that threaten online judicial legitimacy. Overall, the research provides insights that scholars and policymakers may draw on to inform strategies toward rebuilding institutional trust and reducing disinformation in the public social media sphere after a court verdict. Keywords: Public opinion, social media, netizen, presidential election, constitutional court.
Hasrullah et al. (Tue,) studied this question.