ARGUMENT BASED ON SOCIAL SCIENCE INFORMATION HAS GRADUALLY GAINED PROMINENCE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AND DECISIONS OF AMERICAN COURTS. ON SOME OCCASIONS, THE COURTS HAVE EMPLOYED SUCH INFORMATION DEFTLY. ON OTHERS, JUDGES HAVE BEEN TOO CASUAL IN THEIR ACCEPTANCE OF 'TRUTHS' ABOUT HUMAN BEHAVIOR. THERE ARE TWO POINTS THAT JURISTS SHOULD CONSIDER IN DECIDING HOW MUCH FURTHER AND IN WHAT DIRECTION TO PROCEED WITH RESPECT TO THE SOCIAL SCIENCES: (1) SOCIAL SCIENCE IS CONCERNED BASICALLY WITH PREDICTING FUTURE EVENTS, WHEREAS THE PURPOSE OF THE LAW IS TO ORDER FUTURE EVENTS; AND (2) SOCIAL SCIENCE IS RARELY DISPASSIONATE, AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS ARE FREQUENTLY CAUGHT UP IN THE POLITICS WHICH THEIR WORK NECESSARILY INVOLVES. WHEN THE COURTS GROUND THEIR DECISIONS IN THE PREDICTIONS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE (AS OPPOSED TO PAST AGREEMENTS--CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, CUSTOMS, CONTRACTS), THEY SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE UNSETTLED CONDITION OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES AND SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE DISTINCT SOCIAL AND POLITICAL BIAS THAT EXISTS AMONG SOCIAL SCIENTISTS. THE MAJOR IMPACT OF SOCIAL SCIENCE ON LAW MAY LIE IN THE ASSERTIVENESS OF SOCIAL SCIENTISTS IN UNDERTAKING TO EXPLAIN (AT LEAST IN THEORY) NEARLY EVERY ASPECT OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR. THE NUMBER OF AREAS OF BEHAVIOR FOR WHICH TRADITIONAL OR COMMONSENSE EXPLANATION WILL SUFFICE IN SERIOUS ARGUMENT IS DWINDLING. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT A GROUP OF LAWYERS TRAINED BOTH IN THE LAW AND IN SOCIAL SCIENCE METHODOLOGY WILL EMERGE. JUDGES WILL FIND IT INCUMBENT UPON THEMSELVES TO BECOME AS DISCERNING OF RESEARCH METHODS AND FINDINGS AS THEY ARE OF POINTS OF LAW. U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS, PRIMARILY INTERPRETATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION IN LITIGATION CONCERNING EDUCATIONAL MATTERS, ELUCIDATE THE DISCUSSION. (LKM)