well, two things about batson v. kentucky. first, batson v. kentucky was triggered by the justice's use of dissents from denial. typically, people don't pay attention to dissents, but the justice issued dissent after dissent after dissent basically to alert the bar that at least there were a couple justices, him in particular, that was interested in the issue. and secondly, i think, to educate and try to persuade his colleagues. and over the course of a year, he succeeded. he succeeded in persuading other justices to come along with him. and he triggered the -- he triggered a reassessment of swain v. alabama. and then the court agreed with his position, agreed to reverse swain v. alabama. but then the justice wasn't satisfied with that. and he wrote a concurring opinion in which he said i agree with what the court is doing, but the court is not going far enough. it should get rid of preemptory challenges all together. it was that pushing of the envelope that brings a smile to my face and makes me think of just that's the justice thurgood marsha