Losing the Supreme Court’s Only Civil Rights Lawyer

When Justice Ginsburg died on September 18, the nation lost the Supreme Court’s only civil rights lawyer.  For those passionate about equality, her passing is a huge loss to a federal judiciary that is becoming more and more detached from the experiences of actual people.  Before becoming a judge, Justice Ginsburg was deeply connected to inequality because she represented people on the losing end of it.  Her legal career consistently involved pro bono representation of people who could not afford their own lawyer, and her legal training led to valuable insights in her time as a judge.

More than being the Supreme Court’s only civil rights lawyer, Justice Ginsburg was the only lawyer whose career involved representing real people.  Every other justice has only represented corporations, the President, prosecutor’s offices, or other government entities (aside from the very, very rare pro bono case).  Now, not a single Supreme Court justice has ever held a job representing actual, individual, human people.  Among the remaining members of the Supreme Court, you will only find on their résumés corporate law, prosecution, attorney general’s offices, executive branch agencies, and academia.  While these pursuits may have their own value, they do not involve the consistent representation of people experiencing poverty, which means that the Supreme Court is now completely devoid of an informed perspective on the inequality that affects millions of Americans.

The trend of Presidents appointing judges from corporate and prosecutorial backgrounds is not new, and it is not dependent on the political party in power.  Civil rights lawyers (and Supreme Court justices) like Thurgood Marshall and Ruth Bader Ginsburg used their legal career to improve society before becoming judges, but they sadly seem to be part of a by-gone era.

The Supreme Court is emblazoned with the words “Equal Justice Under Law.”  It is lamentable that none of the sitting justices has ever worked for a civil rights organization or held a job tackling pervasive inequality.  Here at Equal Justice Under Law, while we mourn the loss of a great civil rights lawyer and judge, we worry about a future in which the federal judiciary lacks the perspective necessary to promote equal justice.