This paper explores whether or not the recent increase of interest by the U.S. Supreme Court in educational disputes results in a gradual reduction in the role that professional ethics plays in educators' everyday decisions. It is argued that there are links between an educator's professional ethics and constitutional justice. The increase in Supreme Court activity in educational disputes between 1966 and 1985 raises issues of the court's activism and the consistency of the educational policies entailed by Supreme Court rulings. The case of "New Jersey v. T.L.O." illustrates the implications a decision may have for the professional educator. The activism of the Supreme Court may be seen as an obstacle to those who would educate the educators because it impedes the implementation of a code of ethics for educators and it creates confusion about the source of an educator's authority. Clarification of the moral principles found in the U.S. Constitution and in important parts of the education profession's ethics should enhance the educator's ability to identify responsibilities and strengthen the conviction to act on these responsibilities. An appendix outlines arguments in the "T.L.O." case. (SLD)