WASHINGTON (CN) — The image of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, clad in a cowrie shell collar, solemnly watching as President Donald Trump took the oath of office, has become more poignant as the court’s most junior justice has routinely rebuked abuses of power on the high court bench and in the White House.
Jackson made a splash last week when she penned a powerful dissent, accusing her colleagues of not living up to the core judicial principle of equal justice under law. She found the majority’s interpretation of the standing doctrine particularly egregious because it favored powerful business interests.
“This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this court than ordinary citizens,” Jackson wrote in dissent.
Earlier this month, Jackson penned another dissent with similar accusations on the majority’s favoritism toward the Trump administration.
“The court is … suggesting that what would be an extraordinary request for everyone else is nothing more than an ordinary day on the docket for this administration,” Jackson wrote.
Jackson’s bold statements have caught the attention of court watchers as a tribute to her jurisprudence and a message about her role on the high court.
“What Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson appears to be doing is to say that donning the robe means more than agreeing with colleagues,” Michele Goodwin, a professor of constitutional law and global health policy at Georgetown University, said.
Breaking the fourth wall
Unlike the political branches, the Supreme Court is mostly siloed from commentary on its rulings, dismissing critiques as tainted by a desired outcome in a case. Jackson’s dissent in Diamond Alternative Energy v. EPA takes a different tack, stating that the justices have a role in the narrative playing out in academia.
“She is really calling upon her colleagues, not calling them out, but really trying to call them in and understand American law and how it affects people,” Goodwin said.
In Diamond Alternative Energy, Jackson pointed to inconsistencies in the court’s application of standing precedent that could be interpreted as bias for certain applicants. Here, it was a group of fuel producers that wanted to challenge California’s vehicle emissions standards.
Whether or not the justices feel they favor business interests, Jackson urged her colleagues to realize that was the context in which their rulings were being digested.
“Even the mere ‘appearance’ of favoritism, founded or not, can ‘undermine confidence in the integrity of the judiciary,’” Jackson wrote.
Jackson noted that her colleagues didn’t explain why the fuel providers were worthy of the court’s limited bandwidth.
“This silence will only harden their sense that the court softens its certiorari standards when evaluating petitions from moneyed interests,” Jackson wrote.
Teaching an old dog new tricks
Eric Segall, a federal courts and constitutional law professor at Georgia State University College of Law, saw Jackson’s emphasis on the nature of the parties, opposed to traditional standing doctrine, as a welcome change of perspective from the bench. Segall said Jackson demonstrated an ability to take into account varying interests while remaining dogmatic about the results she wants.
“I find her brilliant yet accessible, and boy, is that a hard combination,” Segall said. “She’s engaging with different audiences, but all at the same level.”
Instead of strict adherence to a specific judicial philosophy, court watchers see Jackson as more influenced by her learned experience. Jackson is the first Black woman and the first former public defender to serve on the Supreme Court. Before joining the high court, she served as a trial court judge and on an appeals court. She also worked on the U.S. Sentencing Committee.
“That richness of her experience, both as a very experienced judge and also her American experience, is the sense that one gets from her dissent,” Goodwin said. “It is a sense that is encouraging her colleagues to be able to see aspects of the law that perhaps they yet don’t understand.”
Goodwin compared Jackson’s perspective to that of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who devoted her career to civil service.
“It’s a rarity on our modern court to have individuals who’ve come from serving the public in that type of way,” Goodwin said.
The Supreme Court said it was common sense that the fuel producers in Diamond Alternative Energy were harmed by California’s electric vehicle push, but Jackson questioned whether the justices’ version of common sense was a widely shared view.
“The conservative justices don’t see how much they are sympathetic to standing when they’re sympathetic to the litigants and how much they’re not when they’re not,” Steve Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown, said during a podcast interview.
“I respectfully dissent”
Jackson’s cowrie shell collar was interpreted as a symbol of dissent against Trump, drawing comparisons to Ginsburg’s famous dissent collars. Only months before his return to office, Jackson had warned of the dire consequences of the majority’s presidential immunity ruling, stating that the decision crowned a king above the law.
Cowrie shells hold a symbolic history in African culture. While they were once used as currency in Africa, Asia and Europe, cowries were also believed to offer protection from evil. According to the National Museum of African American History & Culture, historians think cowries were brought to America as a talisman to resist enslavement. The shells are also associated with womanhood and fertility.
While the collar could have been a sign of dissent, it’s also possible it was an homage to Jackson’s ancestry and the perspective she brings to the court.
“Occupying those spaces with a sense of self-worth and dignity is really important,” Goodwin said. “It’s something that men have been able to take for granted because it’s assumed that they belong. So as Justice Ginsburg wore her collars, cowrie shells … show a recognition that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson understands and is not shy about her origin story.”
Jackson did not respond to questions about the meaning behind her collar.