Controversial court rulings reframe public debate without settling the underlying dispute.

Evidence

The reactions to Goodridge and succeeding cases show that controversial judicial rulings rarely settle matters. These rulings contributed to the national debate over same-sex relationships, but they certainly did not end it. … They elevate issues on the public agenda, and they often change the terms of debate. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3363

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the Rosenberg ‘courts as mostly powerless’ debate taught in judicial politics courses. — connects to: The Court accepts nationally important political disputes but avoids unresolvable ones — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 913; Court rulings can be interpreted to support both sides of a contested policy debate — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 208
• SEED: Article angle: courts as agenda-setters rather than deciders — how litigation shifts a fight from legislatures to constitutions.