Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Judges are making unlikely appearances, taking the leap from the courtroom to the silver screen. Over the last few years, we have seen United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg rise to sensational levels of fame as a pop culture icon, culminating in two movies within a year about Justice Ginsburg’s life and her work and challenges in getting where she is today. Along the way, she has inspired many aspiring lawyers and activists to take a role in their government.
As debatably the least visible and understood branch of government, it is interesting to see this shift to shine such a spotlight on the members of the judiciary. A shocking figure that Chief Justice John Roberts has discussed in many interviews is that only 15 percent of Americans can name a member of the United States Supreme Court, but two-thirds of Americans could name a judge on the original run of “American Idol.” However, in recent years, it is hard to imagine someone not knowing the name of Justice Ginsburg or even Justice Brett Kavanaugh with all of the mass media coverage surrounding them. As a result, there seems to be more awareness of what the Supreme Court does and how it functions as a third, and very important, branch of the federal government. Objectively, it is a good thing when people in a democracy understand the government and take an interest in how it functions, since our democracy depends on civic participation.
A central facet of debate in the legal and governmental world turns on the question of whether judges should be in such a visible and accessible position to the public. Judges, especially justices of the United States Supreme Court, make such controversial and impactful decisions regarding the everyday lives of citizens that an elusive and enigmatic personality offers benefits to how they are able to perform their jobs. This side of the debate maintains that in order for judges to make detached and unbiased decisions, a level of distance is healthy. Increased visibility and access to members of the judicial branch begin to have a questionable impact when judges’ decisions start to reflect too strongly the preferences of their fans and seemingly are based less on law and more on popular opinion and the personal preferences of the judges themselves. This is incredibly dangerous and potentially deadly to not only the nationwide perception of the judicial branch, but also to its perception in the eyes of a global audience. In order for the decisions of judiciary to be respected as valid, fair and impartial, the method in which the law is interpreted and decided must be reflective of the values originally intended for the branch. This means that while striving for accessibility for the members of the court, objectivity and detached opinions should remain a priority.
As law students, this phenomenon of more visible members of the judiciary is particularly prevalent. Because the standard approach to legal education utilizes the case method, we become very familiar with how some judges and justices think, write and interpret. It is imaginable that in the days before there was this human interest focus on the judiciary, law students still formed opinions about the judges and justices, albeit likely more limited to their judicial opinions as opposed to their personalities. Now when we go over cases, law students take the time to gossip about rumors of drama at the Supreme Court and wonder how Justice Ginsburg was such close friends with the late Justice Antonin Scalia. This interest in the personal lives of members of the judiciary is likely nothing new for law students, but the rise of the Notorious RBG phenomenon has spread the curiosity to other members of society. As we discussed earlier, there are pros and cons of the public becoming more familiar with the personal lives of the members of the courts. However, as a law student, it is likely just expanding on a narrative most are already creating.
As the most senior woman on the Supreme Court, and the second female justice ever appointed, many law students naturally admire Justice Ginsburg. They are curious about how someone broke the boundaries she did and hope to emulate her career. That’s why the movies and literature focusing on her life are so fascinating, because the demand for the information already existed for law students. Additionally, as the nomination process has evolved to dive deeper into judicial nominees’ personal lives, law students naturally take more interest than the average person. While you’re in the throes of reading hundreds of cases a semester, preparing to welcome a new justice into your idea of the Supreme Court is likely to spark an interest in how they will fit in with the personalities you believe are there.•
• Francesca Campione and Amanda Vaughn are second-year law students at Indiana University Maurer School of Law. Opinions expressed are those of the authors.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.