Our courts' decisions do not permeate the public consciousness - we have no equivalent of the Brown v Board of Education ruling which outlawed racial segregation, or of Roe v Wade, which enshrined a woman's right to choose not just into law but into the public imagination as well.

In this quote, Emily Thornberry points out the lack of decisions from the courts that have had a lasting impact on public consciousness in the same way that landmark cases like Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade have. She suggests that these significant rulings didn't just change the law; they became ingrained in the public imagination. Thornberry emphasizes that these cases are remembered not only for their legal implications but also for how they shaped public opinion and societal norms.

The reference to Brown v. Board of Education highlights the ruling that declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, a decision that had far-reaching effects on civil rights and social equality. Similarly, Roe v. Wade enshrined a woman’s right to choose an abortion, which not only legally protected this right but also became a symbol of women's rights and personal freedom in the broader public discourse. Thornberry suggests that these rulings have left a permanent mark on societal values, something that she believes is lacking in recent court decisions.

The origin of the quote comes from Thornberry's commentary on the state of law and its cultural impact. As a prominent British politician, Thornberry is often concerned with issues of social justice and public policy, and she uses these historic examples to underscore how certain legal decisions can shape national conversations. She argues that some legal rulings fail to inspire the same level of public engagement or social change, despite their importance.

Ultimately, Thornberry’s quote is a reflection on the power of legal decisions to influence not just the law, but also the collective consciousness of society. She contrasts historical cases with more recent decisions, pointing out that some rulings may have profound legal implications but fail to enter the public’s broader imagination or lead to significant cultural shifts. This underscores her belief that the impact of court decisions is not just about legal enforcement but also about how they resonate with the public mind.