On the other hand, the Supreme Court of the United States plays an important role in American constitutional development. Many of us have devoted our research efforts to the institutional history of the Court, but I would suggest that once again, we need to reach further in our study and in our teaching. We can no longer view American constitutional history as a study of U. S. Supreme Court precedents. We owe it to ourselves and our students to expand our epistemology beyond constitutional case-law. Personal behavior is a fascinating component of any historical study.
Individuals really do make a difference in our lives, and in the life of nations.
Some of us have become involved in a close study of why Justices and Courts decide cases in certain ways. These questions demand that we look into conclusions suggested by our colleagues in psychology, sociology, theology, philosophy, and a number of other social science and humanities disciplines. These thoughts will suggest that my optimism for the future of U. S. constitutional history derives in part from my perception that we already have begun the process of making the subject interdisciplinary. There is growing attention to comparative constitutional studies which help us to understand other systems even as we gain new insight into our own. It is gratifying to realize that we need not dilute the richness of constitutional history before it is palatable to undergraduates.