This is an age old debate between judicial activism and judicial originalism. Most issues seem to stem from interpretation of the text.

Activist wing thinks it needs to be interpreted within the current framework of judicial, social and political viewpoints while originalism wants it to be interpreted in the way it was originally written. It's hard to say one way or another.

Activits would claim Brown vs Board created the march to racial equality, while originalist would say passing of Civil Rights Law is the appropriate way. It's a debate that is not going away anytime soon.