It's not just judicial rulings we have to research but often times activists will send out missives designed to trigger outrage responses that aren't supported by the actual text in new legislation.
Just look at the responses even here where too many people think that what the law or what the Supreme Court said - the actual plain language English words themselves- are not to be found in the written text, but can be altered at the whim of the personal opinion by the commentator.
We can argue about whether Socrates as reported by Plato, or the SC or the legislature of the State of California was correct in the outcome or we can argue about what they meant by what they said. But the actual words on paper, without extraordinary evidence, the actual words they intended to put down on the paper and this is not subject to random opinion.