Traditional studies of democratization in both the Middle East and beyond identify an efficient, neutral judiciary as a key contributor to greater democratic governance. Since the early 2000s, many regimes in the Middle East have implemented new reforms to their judicial systems, while they have maintained their authoritarian rule and resisted pressures for democratization. One exemplary case of this trend is Morocco, whose judiciary was historically known for its corruption and inequity. Indeed, even in the era that preceded French colonialism, the use of bribes and personal connections (known as wasta in Arabic) to influence judicial decisions was so widespread that it was considered “the norm in legal matters” according to one early study. To combat these practices and increase its support among citizens, Morocco’s regime introduced a series of judicial reforms beginning in the 2000s: These included a new code of family laws in 2004, a new constitution in 2011, and a judicial reform package in 2013. Although scholars have analyzed the content and implementation of these legal reforms, they have done less work analyzing citizen attitudes toward them. Under what conditions do citizens come to view the judiciary as equitable, accessible, and efficient, or, alternatively, perceive it as corrupt, arbitrary, and mismanaged? To answer this question, I have launched a population based survey experiment in Morocco in collaboration with a non-governmental organization, Droit et Justice, which will be completed in winter 2014. The results of this survey experiment are important because they will help both scholars and policymakers identify specific social groups and geographic regions in Morocco that continue to feel marginalized and underserved by a corrupt judicial system, despite the country’s significant progress in implementing a number of judicial reforms since the early 2000s. Specifically, I am conducting a nationally-representative survey experiment that will use a series of list experiment questions (i.e. item count technique) to reveal citizen attitudes of judicial corruption. In particular, the survey deploys the item count technique to investigate how much citizens believe judicial decisions are driven by either (1) the paying of bribes to judges or (2) the leveraging of personal ‘connections’ (i.e. wasta) at the courthouse, or (3) membership in a local influential or aristocratic family. Approximately 1,200 respondents will be included within the survey, which will be conducted in all 16 provinces of Morocco.