Historic

The confirmation of Ketanji Brown-Jackson to the Supreme Court of the United States this past Thursday was historic, we have been told time and again by politicians, media pundits, and celebrities. She is historic, not because of anything she has accomplished in her life, she is historic because of her race and her gender, how she was born. Joe Biden completely marginalized her accomplishments, because he announced prior to nominating her, that he would only nominate a person who was black and female – the very criteria that makes the nomination historic. Unlike, Barack Obama who had to beat out people of other races and genders to become the first black president, Ketanji Brown-Jackson only had to beat out other black and female candidates whose nominations would have been equally as historic as hers if anyone of them were chosen by Joe Biden. So, it was not Ketanji Brown-Jackson who made this accomplishment historic, in fact, it was Joe Biden, a white male who did that.

Our society’s hyper-focus on race and gender, diminishes our country, our institutions, and each one of us. We all become reduced to our race and our gender, and who we are and what we do become marginalized, as we have seen with Ketanji Brown Jackson whose confirmation is only historic when she has been reduced down to her race and her gender. Her confirmation is additionally historic because she is the first Justice confirmed to the Supreme Court explicitly put there because of her race and gender.

The belief that intentionally diversifying the court by nominating someone solely based on race and gender is a desirable because different races and genders bring a “different perspective” to the court, is racist and sexist at its core; it is based on the erroneous assumption that everyone of a specific race or gender holds the same point of view, and that point of view is different from those of other races and sexes. Can someone tell me what the “black” legal perspective is? Or what the “woman” legal perspective is? No one can, because there isn’t one; blacks and women are not monolithic in their thinking. Last I checked, Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown-Jackson have two completely different legal perspectives. Amy Coney-Barrett and Elena Kagan consistently rule differently in the cases they hear. So, there isn’t a monolithic black woman legal perspective that was needed on the Supreme Court to broaden its thinking. Believing there is a black perspective or woman perspective is not only racist but is a threat to the Constitution itself. It is not the Justices’ job to interpret the Constitution based on their personal life experiences, it’s their job to defend the Constitution which Ketanji Brown-Jackson seemed very unwilling to do during her confirmation hearings.