Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s journey to the Supreme Court

JUANA SUMMERS, HOST:

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has this recollection of her entry into the national spotlight just about two years ago.

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON: I had been through what I thought was a pretty treacherous time, for those who remember the confirmation hearings.

SUMMERS: Senators on the Judiciary Committee made remarks and suggestions about her judicial philosophy, experience and identity that, at times, got pretty hostile.

(SOUNDBITE OF MONTAGE)

LINDSEY GRAHAM: Bottom line is when it is about philosophy, when it’s somebody of color on our side, it’s about we’re all racist if we ask hard questions. It’s not going to fly with us.

UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Your public comments about – and I’m going to quote you – “the transformative power of progressive education,” end quote – these are deeply concerning.

JOSH HAWLEY: Why wouldn’t you want to sentence that person to more time rather than less? Why isn’t that rational?

BROWN JACKSON: Senator, I’ve answered this question, and I’ll stand on what I already answered.

SUMMERS: That hearing was the start of a journey not just towards her eventual confirmation as the first Black woman to ever sit on the United States Supreme Court but towards writing her first memoir, “Lovely One,” which is out today.

BROWN JACKSON: I was just so grateful to get through that process and to have this opportunity to serve the American people.

SUMMERS: I spoke to Justice Jackson about how she thinks the court should continue to serve the people at a time when trust has waned and how she kept her composure during her confirmation hearing.

BROWN JACKSON: As I say in the book, some very wise person in my White House prep team said, you can get angry, or you can be a Supreme Court justice. And so I thought about that in my head when I was responding to the senators. I also had the good fortune, I think, of getting to meet with senators. And I think, in my head, I was calling back to our one-on-one meetings as I listened to them ask me questions in that forum, and it helped.

SUMMERS: I have to imagine, though, it’s challenging to sit there. These are people who are probing questions about your record, making assertions about your very character, and you’re sitting there and being asked to respond to that. What’s going through your head as you do that?

BROWN JACKSON: I think what’s going on in my head is I’m thinking, they are speaking to the American people, and now I’m needing to speak to the American people. And whatever assertions or assumptions or character attacks they are making, I want people to see who I really am. And I didn’t want to take the bait, as they say.

SUMMERS: Past Supreme Court justices have suggested that it can take years before you get to feel really comfortable on the court. You come in with such experience to the job. But what surprised you?

BROWN JACKSON: You know, I think being on a panel of nine judges is a little challenging. You know, when I was – most of my judicial experience came from the district court, where I was by myself – one judge in the courtroom, your own courtroom. You control everything. And so collective decision-making, I think, is a little challenging, and so having to kind of navigate that is surprising. But, again, I had clerked on the court, so I wasn’t unfamiliar with how it operates.

SUMMERS: There is, of course, a presidential election coming up, and every indication at this point is that it will be close. If the results are so close and are contested up into the Supreme Court, as in Bush v. Gore, given how deeply divided this country is and can be, do you think it’s possible that the court can craft opinions that not only seem credible to the public but also maintain the court’s integrity?

BROWN JACKSON: Oh, not only do I think it’s possible. I think that’s our responsibility. That’s our duty. That’s what the court’s role is in our system of government. And yes, absolutely.

SUMMERS: You made the point that it is the court’s duty to deliver opinions credibly and with integrity, and you have clear confidence that it can and that it will. But obviously, the response to certain bigger decisions, including one that happened right before your first term, the Dobbs decision, has brought a lot of increased scrutiny to the credibility of the court among other issues. So I’m wondering if you have any words on how to reassure the public in this moment, in our politics and in our nation, about the court, about the institution, about the credibility, about the integrity.

BROWN JACKSON: The court doesn’t have any mechanism of enforcement of its opinions. It’s because people believe in the court and believe in the rule of law that people follow what the court decides. I guess I would just say more broadly that what we’re seeing now, in terms of the criticisms and critiques, are part of the democratic process. You know, the court, in my view, is not above criticism or constraint. And in democratic constitutional republic, which is what we have, the people decide what the function and structure of government should be. And so I see a lot of the debate going on right now as part of the process of the public engaging on the structure and the function of the court. And so that’s the way our system works.

SUMMERS: That said, what do you make of calls for ethics reform for the court?

BROWN JACKSON: Well, the court has recently adopted ethics rules that are similar to the rules that lower courts have had for some time, if not since their founding. As I mentioned, I was a lower court judge, and I operated under ethics rules. I’m personally glad that the court has now adopted a code of ethics.

SUMMERS: None of the reform rules that have been introduced, as I understand, are mandatory. So is that enough? These guidelines are in place, and they’re important by your admission, but do you think there should be something more?

BROWN JACKSON: Well, you know, the guidelines have been adopted. The justices have committed to following them. I think the question is whether there’s something about the Supreme Court that would make it different than the binding ethics rules that exist in the lower courts. And at least up to this point, I haven’t seen any good reason why there shouldn’t be binding rules. But so far, we’re not there.

SUMMERS: That was Associate Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. Her book, “Lovely One,” is out today. Elsewhere on the show, she opens up about her personal life, including one experience her family is disclosing publicly for the first time. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.