A growing set of survey and experimental studies in recent years have examined whether the support for democracy is eroding in established democracies, but this research has almost exclusively focused on the attitudes of citizens (Graham and Svolik, 2020; Wuttke et al., 2022). Yet, political elites are often considered even more crucial ‘gatekeepers’ of democracy than ordinary citizens (Linz and Stepan, 1978; O’Donnell and Schmitter, 1986; Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2019; Peffley & Rohrschneider, 2009). Our paper builds on the classic literature that has contrasted democratic attitudes between politicians and ordinary citizens in established democracies (Stouffer, 1955). While older literature has generally suggested that politicians should display a higher commitment to democratic norms than ordinary citizens by virtue of their socialization to pro-regime norms, more recent studies have questioned these assumptions and suggested that elites’ commitment to democratic principles may be heterogeneous and context dependent (Peffley & Rohrschneider, 2009; Shamir, 1991; Sniderman et al., 1996). Our study provides novel evidence on these questions by comparing the extent of commitment to democratic principles both among politicians and citizens using survey data from a unique, nationally representative panel of local and regional-level politicians (n=1,100) as well as a nationally-representative citizen panel (n=6,000) in Finland. Our surveys measured politicians’ and citizens’ commitment to specific democratic institutions and democratic checks and balances using a question battery developed by Claassen et al. (2024). Our paper therefore provides new evidence on the robustness of the commitment to democratic institutions both among political elites and citizens in established democracies.