Abstract
This address explores the Supreme Court's involvement in the nation's politico-moral disputes. The Court sometimes injects itself into these disputes and through dicta and other inspirational activities becomes a cheerleader for one side. I consider the effectiveness of the Court's cheerleading in inspiring change in national policy following Roe v. Wade (1973) and Brown v. Board (1954), finding that judicial cheerleading was much more effective for achieving a consensus about desegregation than for achieving one about abortion rights. I conclude by arguing that the Court's cheerleading: (1) has the capacity to bring politico-moral issues to the front burner, (2) is more effective in supporting change rather than in defending the status quo, (3) does not frighten or shame the losing side into abandoning its cause, often having the opposite effect, and (4) must persuade the uncommitted within a decade if its cause is to be successful.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
