The Supreme Court as a Cheerleader in Politico-Moral Disputes

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.