It has been argued that public opinion and a want of change comes prior to the courts involvement in deciding judicial cases. Thus stating that the Supreme Court does not cause social change but is just an actor within it. For example it is believed that during the 1950's the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education did not cause the civil rights movement, but rather there was already a present opinion and pressure for the movement. This is in contrast to the belief that courts are actually drivers of social change and that first the Court rules, and then social change happens. For example: when the Supreme Court ruled on Rowe v. Wade it gave people a platform to support, or rebel against causing people to have an opinion and multiple groups to spring up as either pro-life or pro-choice. Do you agree that there is already a presence of public pressure, so the court is just an actor? Or is the supreme court a driver in social change and shift in public opinion comes later?