This Article will suggest that TJ has occasionally been part of the United States Supreme Court's jurisprudence. The Court sometimes finds itself at the center of deeply-divisive national controversies. On those occasions, the opinion of the Court can, and ought to, play a role in healing the nation's controversy-inflicted wounds. The Court should consciously craft an opinion that speaks to the American people as a whole and that calls on every citizen, regardless of the fervency of his or her beliefs, to accept the resolution of the controversy offered by the Court. During such crises, citizens are unlikely to accept solutions crafted by elected officials, whom they rightly judge to be partisan politicians. The Court's removal from the political process allows it an opportunity to have a therapeutic role in healing the nation's wounds. I shall focus on two decisions: (1) Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the Supreme Court's seminal decision holding that state segregation of students by race in public schools violates the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause; and (2) Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey,' the Court's important decision reaffirming a woman's right to choose.
Robert Jerome Glennon, The Nation's Teacher: The Role of the United States Supreme Court During Times of Crisis, 24 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 327 (2000).