Do you think brown v. board of education (1954) served its purpose of societal desegregation well? or, do you think that that lack of legal justification in the decision created a more litigious environment for civil rights law suits? think about and justify your position. do americans change their positions just because the supreme court rules a certain way? what negative externalities does public policy, particularly judicial policy create?

It didn't and it did. Just because the case happened in 1954 doesn't mean that schools ended segregation, as a matter of fact it lasted for almost a decade more, if not longer because schools would still refuse to obey. Southern communities were especially supportive of segregation, and even when the civil rights acts were implemented they still didn't support them and they didn't want to be around African-Americans only it had to be hidden. On the other hand, when a Supreme Court makes a decision it does sway people to support it. That is because there is an idea of everyone being equal in the eyes of law and the supreme court is the judge on what is lawful and what isn't based on the constitution. Since there's no greater legal act than the constitution, when the supreme court makes a decision it means that the decision fits the constitution and for many Americans the constitution is almost a holy document that guides their lives. A negative externality can be for example the rise of extremism. During the reconstruction period Ku Klux Klan rose as a negative externality of the era. During the civil acts era they grew stronger again because racist people were enraged by things like desegregation.

Native americans is the answer and have you ever heard of google