Should SCOTUS have binding ethics rules? Ketanji Brown Jackson doesn't see why not

When Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson entered the national spotlight, she found praise and also criticism.

Much of that criticism stemmed from U.S. senators who grilled her on her judicial philosophy, her career, even her identity. In a new interview with NPR, Jackson called the confirmation process “treacherous.”

And two years after that confirmation, she’s sharing more of her story in her new memoir, Lovely One. (The title, according to Jackson’s beloved Aunt Carolynn, is the meaning of her first and middle names, Ketanji Onyika, in an African dialect.)

In the book, Jackson describes how she endured her confirmation hearing, along with her multi-generational path to becoming the first Black woman to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court — a branch which she tells NPR remains ready to offer credible opinions on the most contentious issues facing the nation, even in the face of waning public confidence.

She also said she sees no reason why justices shouldn’t be held to more binding ethics rules, outside of the first-ever voluntary code the court adopted last year.

In the interview with All Things Considered co-host Juana Summers, Jackson also shares stories about marriage and parenthood, including one aspect about parenthood that briefly had her reconsidering whether she would pursue a seat on the nation’s highest court.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity. Listen to All Things Considered to hear the full interview.

Interview highlights

Juana Summers: There is 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?

Ketanji 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 and among other issues. So I'm wondering if you have any words on how to reassure the public in this moment and our politics and in our nation about the court, about the institution, about the credibility, about the integrity.

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 are seeing now in terms of the criticisms and critiques are part of the democratic process. The court, in my view, is not above criticism or constraint in a democratic constitutional republic, which is what we have. The people decide what the function and structure of government should be. 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, so that's the way our system works.

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

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. 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?

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. 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: You also write about your journey into parenthood and the struggles of parenthood. And one thing that you talk about in some detail in the book is your eldest daughter’s autism diagnosis. I just want to ask you, is this something your family has disclosed publicly before?

Jackson: It has not been something that we disclosed publicly before. This is so much a part of who we are as a family and who I have become as a human being. This was something that we focused on when I decided to accept the president's nomination, because I felt that if I were to go forward and be the nominee for the Supreme Court, this might be something that reporters would find out. If my daughter was uncomfortable with it, I might have chosen not to pursue this position. But she encouraged me and that gave me the courage, I think, to disclose it, not only part of the confirmation process internally, but publicly now as a part of the book. It was challenging, though, throughout her upbringing. And I just wanted to be honest, in part because I wanted people to understand that as a working parent, you can manage even when you have challenging circumstances in terms of your family. And my daughter said, "I'm not ashamed of it. I'm happy to have you tell the truth about our family."

Summers: This next question is one that I have a feeling there are some people who will say I should not ask it of you, but it is something that you wrote about in your book, so I'm going to go there, and it is about your hair. It is something that I immediately noticed about you, perhaps because I spent so many years agonizing over whether to lock my own hair, wrestling with questions of, “Will I be seen as professional when I show up to interview someone or show up on their television? Will they see me as credible or will they respect me?” So I want to ask you about that journey, because especially as I flip through the photos and your book, it wasn't always sisterlocks. There was a journey that came into that and I'm sure a lot of thought.

Jackson: Oh, absolutely. And the questions that you said that you wrestled with were 100% resonant with me in terms of how I also thought, especially being a lawyer, being at, you know, big law firms at times wanting to be taken seriously. But I have to tell you, I got to a point where I couldn't do it any other way because there wasn't enough time to do what I traditionally did with straightening my hair and curling my hair and doing all the self-care that is necessary to maintain. It is work. And when I saw a woman who had — I didn't even know the name sisterlocks — and I was like, I want that. And I asked her. I chased her down and I said, "You know what, who does your hair? What is it?" And she gave me the name of her loctician. And I have used only this one woman for 15 years.

Summers: That's incredible. I want to bring up your beloved grandmother. You wrote that she prayed so hard for you, she wanted so much for you, but she didn't live to see you graduate from Harvard, to get married, to raise two beautiful girls, to be the first Black woman on the Supreme Court. How do you think she would feel about where you are today?

Jackson: Oh, I think she would be so incredibly proud of me. Knowing how much she prayed for me, knowing that she used to say all the time, you know, you are a blessed child. I felt that way and I give so much tribute to her, not only in the book, but in my life. I think she would have been enormously proud of me.

Copyright 2024, NPR

• Minnesota House tie in peril after judge rules DFL lawmaker can’t be sworn in
• Government funding bill clears Congress and heads to President Biden, averting a shutdown
• Trump’s reelection victory pushes some LGTBQ Minneapolis residents to safety training
• Carter takes scalpel to St. Paul budget with line-item veto, approves smaller levy increase