Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson made headlines recently for appearing in a one-time cameo in the Broadway musical “& Juliet,” a modern reimagining of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. While Jackson’s performance was celebrated by some as a personal milestone, her decision to step onto the stage has drawn criticism, particularly from conservatives who view the move as a distraction from her judicial responsibilities.
The cameo, which included speaking and singing roles, was specifically created for Justice Jackson. The production team publicly supported her participation, posting on social media, “Let’s make that teenage dream come true, Justice Jackson.” Jackson, who has long expressed a love for theater, said the opportunity fulfilled a dream she had articulated in her Harvard application essay, where she envisioned being “the first Black, female Supreme Court justice to appear on a Broadway stage.”
Critics, however, see the situation differently, arguing that a Supreme Court justice engaging in such extracurricular pursuits sends the wrong message about the seriousness of her role. Many view this as a waste of time, pointing to the Court’s packed docket of high-profile cases and the broader cultural battles over issues such as free speech, religious liberty, and the role of government.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson debuts on Broadway
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) December 16, 2024
This isn’t the first time Jackson’s cultural interests have raised eyebrows. While she has every right to enjoy personal hobbies, critics point out that the judiciary is facing increasing scrutiny for political polarization, declining public trust, and critical decisions that will shape the future of the nation. At a time when public confidence in the Court is already fragile, appearances like this risk undermining the seriousness of her position.
Conservative critics also see her Broadway performance as indicative of a larger cultural shift they view as problematic: a blurring of lines between professional roles and personal ambitions among public servants. By participating in a Broadway production, they argue, Jackson risks trivializing the gravity of her judicial responsibilities, especially when those responsibilities impact the lives of millions of Americans.
Justice Jackson’s Broadway appearance may have fulfilled a personal dream, but it also raises legitimate questions about the role of public figures in maintaining the integrity and focus demanded by their positions. For a Supreme Court justice, critics argue, the job should come first—always.
