Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's recent performance in the Broadway musical "& Juliet" has sparked a debate about judicial impartiality.
Critics are questioning whether her involvement in a production featuring LGBTQ+ themes could affect her objectivity as the court deliberates on a significant case regarding the prohibition of transgender surgical procedures for minors in Tennessee.
Legal experts, including Thomas Jipping from the Heritage Foundation, have expressed concerns about the implications of Jackson's participation in such an advocacy-driven show.
Jipping stated to FOX News, "I think it's a huge mistake for federal judges, especially Supreme Court justices, to engage in activities that clearly put the stamp of approval on an ideological position regarding issues that could come before the court, which is practically the definition of a threat to their impartiality, the appearance of impropriety."
The musical "& Juliet" reimagines Shakespeare's classic tale, placing a strong emphasis on female empowerment and nonbinary representation.
Jackson's one-time performance at the Stephen Sondheim Theatre featured her alongside notable figures such as TikTok star Charli D'Amelio.
The show has been recognized for its modern take on traditional narratives, with Jackson fulfilling a personal ambition by becoming the first Supreme Court justice to perform on Broadway.
While some have compared to past instances of justices participating in the arts, such as Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg appearing in a Washington National Opera production, the current climate surrounding judicial ethics is more scrutinized.
Jipping pointed out that liberal criticism of conservative justices for ethical lapses has grown, prompting calls for stricter oversight of the judiciary.
As the Supreme Court prepares for a pivotal ruling in the U.S. v. Skrmetti case, which could set precedents for future transgender rights issues, the focus on Jackson's Broadway appearance raises questions about the standards of conduct expected from justices.
The court is set to continue oral arguments in January, with a decision anticipated by July 2025.
