The role of the judge as public educator is not so much a new responsibility as the resumption of a function long honored in history: the judge as teacher and instructor. Although judges are already on the lecture circuit, attending meetings and conventions, writing articles, and visiting schools, these activities are almost exclusively within the world of the legal profession. Judges should also speak at colleges and high schools, the PTA, the Junior League, and civic clubs, as well as write articles for publications that reach large segments of the public. One traditional objection to more public outreach by judges is that judges should not take time away from their primary professional obligation to decide cases. The argument for greater judicial involvement in public education is not that it should encroach upon bench time but rather that judges should devote more of their off-bench professional activities to public education. The second major objection to judges becoming more involved in public education is that judges should avoid public controversy. It is impossible, however, for judges to remain uninvolved in controversy. The involvement of the judiciary in controversial cases and decisionmaking inevitably makes them targets for criticism and public debate. It makes more sense for judges to become involved in the debate about the meaning and wisdom of their decisions. The public could profit from being better informed by judges using nonlegal language to explain decisions which the public is ill-equipped to understand without instruction from experts. Increased judicial involvement with the public will also benefit judges, as they can gain a new appreciation of ways in which the law does not serve the public well. Ten footnotes are provided.