The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Has Any Reporter Asked Justice Jackson To Comment On Her Talisman Worn To The Inauguration?
How many reporters asked Martha Ann Alito about her flags?
The inauguration was Monday. Today is Thursday. I have seen zero coverage in the mainstream media about Justice Jackson's attire. Has any reporter asked Justice Jackson if she realized she wore a symbol that has been widely recognized as a talisman to ward off evil?
ABA Journal provides links to some of the coverage:
As a fashion statement, there was some disagreement. Josh Blackman, a professor at the South Texas College of Law in Houston, initially called the cowrie shells a "fashion faux pas," while fashion historian Shelby Ivey Christie said the piece had undeniable visual impact.
The shell collar "brilliantly reinterprets the traditional judicial jabot through an African American cultural lens," Christie told HuffPost. The shell pattern suggests "ceremony and significance" along with "importance and intentionality," she said.
But there may have been a deeper meaning, according to HuffPost, Vogue, Ebony, the Root, Parade, Above the Law and a Volokh Conspiracy post by Blackman.
But silence from the large newspapers and media outlets.
This silence would be unremarkable, but for the persistent scrutiny attacks on Justices Thomas and Alito. ProPublica spent a year scrubbing through social media accounts to trace where in the world is Clarence Thomas. But no one has asked KBJ what she was wearing to the Capitol. Reporters have accosted the Alitos in their driveway, and interviewed their neighbors about flags. But has anyone sent a note to the Public Information Office?
I will continue to wait.
Update: An article on Huffington Post about Justice Jackson's talisman originally included this line:
After all, Jackson is the first Black Supreme Court justice to sit on the court. "Even folks unfamiliar with its cultural significance can recognize it as a meaningful choice."
I know that liberals do not believe that Clarence Thomas is actually black. For once, they wrote it! And what about Justice Thurgood Marshall?
The page was later fixed to say:
After all, Jackson is the first Black female justice to sit on the court. "Even folks unfamiliar with its cultural significance can recognize it as a meaningful choice."
I'm not sure what the addition of the word "female" does here. Clarence Thomas is also descended from African slaves.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
FFS. Is there a way to block Blackman posts?
Thank God that United doesn't give him an extra screen to work on.
There is a scroll thingee on your compute mouse. Just use it.
There aren't enough inches on the desktop to scroll down past the roughly 473 posts Blackman has foisted on us in the last 3 days.
Yet people insist that he reads these comments.
I proved earlier today that he does. (That's not really accurate: I showed in a different JB post today, that Josh at least read the comments in that particular thread. Make of that what you will.) 🙂
Blackman missed the most important point -- it was Alito's WIFE who flew the flags -- it was only guilt by association whereas here SHE (and not her spouse) wore the shells.
HER ACT VERSUS THE ACT OF A SPOUSE...
So true. It was also Martha Ann who spit on the neighbors!
How do you know that?
I mean, I thought the whole flag thing was pretty silly as a kerfuffle, but "Alito blames his wife" doesn't really establish that Alito's wife did it, and even if she's the one who put up the flags, they were at his house, which means he had to choose to leave them up.
Damn, bro -- that's a bit... misogynistic of you.
How many posts can a legal blog dedicate to gossip?
all of them
"I'm not sure what the addition of the word "female" does here."
Well, Thomas isn't known for wearing necklaces.
This does not even rise to the level of gossip.
What is Blackman raving about? The shells look good, I think, and if they are a connection to her ancestry, and traditionally were thought to ward off evil, WTF is wrong with that. There's no political statement here.
Blackman continues to sink lower. What an ass.
"There's no political statement here."
What "evil" was in the Rotunda she needed to protect herself against?
Or, there was not evil warding involved and it was just a necklace and Blackman is being a weirdo.
Someone was being a weirdo alright, but it was not Blackman.
And Alito's WIFE'S flags are just colorful pieces of cloth...
I mean, Trump, obviously. But who said anything about evil? Not Justice Jackson.
Still truly a despicable piece of shit, Blackman
>The shell collar "brilliantly reinterprets the traditional judicial jabot through an African American cultural lens," Christie told HuffPost
Jesus, why does every Democrat bootlick and worship their political elites? She could've walked in just as ridiculously with a bone through her nose and a witch doctor's headdress and that bootlicker would've said the same thing.
Among the many differences between the two parties is that the Republicans are independent thinkers who make their own judgments-- Trump was hardly an establishment choice in 2016, after all, the voters just did their own thing. Democrats are much more used to being told what to think and what to do, then thinking and doing it, then repeating it to each other in their echo chamber to make sure everybody else is thinking and doing it. C.f. them locking themselves even deeper into epistemic culture by creating new platforms and deleting/blocking everything that doesn't match the party line.
L, as they say, OL.
The lack of self awareness is astounding.
Jan 7
Republicans: That was wrong
Trump: It was an event of Love
Republicans: It was an event of Love
Where is it that they put copper rings around women's neck and mess up their spines? Memory is Africa...
Burma
I've been to Burma 3 times, but never noticed that. Northern Thailand, however does have this, and it's quite common in the areas outside of Chiang Mai. A very touristy thing to do is to take a day-trip via bus/organized tour, and visit one or two of the villages. A photographer's wet dream, if you're into that kind of thing. (And I certainly was, each time I found myself in that general area.)
Not sure why Blackman doesn't also ask about anyone wearing a Christian cross as that, too, is intended to ward off evil. I bet folks with crosses have been at every US Presidential inauguration in history. Heck, they even swear on a Bible. Yet a shell neckless is a controversy?
"intended to ward off evil"
No it isn't. Its a symbol of faith. Maybe a few use it to ward off evil, but its a small minority.
You've watched too many vampire movies.
Did you see any vampires at the inauguration?
It worked.
"Did you see any vampires at the inauguration?"
Hillary was there.
She, like Pelosi, may be a lich.
We have a winner!
So you agree it can be worn to ward off evil but also note (correctly, IMHO) that it is worn as a symbol denoting one's community. Just like what Justice Jackson wore.
Garish shells v. tiny cross.
It looks like those wooded beaded things you can but for car seats.
So you don’t like her fashion choice.
And?
What’s the big deal?
So the new scandal is you don't like her fashion.
Its not a "scandal" nor a "big deal", its just her being criticized a bit.
There is a difference between a thumb-sized cross (or Star of David) and something the size of what she was wearing.
If someone was wearing a cross with that number of square inches, it would have been an issue!!!
"Hello?"
"Hello. Hello?"
"Hello. Is this Justice Jackson."
"Yes, I am Justice Jackson."
"What are you wearing?"
This isn't much of a thread but you win it anyway.
Yep, JF Carr has won the internet for today.
Does...does Josh know that he could also ask Justice Jackson, and report back whatever her response was (even if it was no response?).
Would be pretty reasonable if he's that bothered by it.
"Hey, Ketanji! Josh here. I know like most supremes you probably follow my work. Thanks and check out my post on the birthright thing, you'll probably see that case soon. Anyway, what's with the shells?"
Do the words "restraining order" mean anything?
heh
Hey Josh: Why don't you get back to us if you discover that Justice Jackson has accepted and failed to report millions of dollars in gifts, flights, yacht voyages, and luxury trips? You know, like your idols Alito and Thomas have done repeatedly.
And specially written parts in Broadway musicals.
How much do you think that in-kind contribution was worth?
TEN MILLION DOLLARS.
Three subway tokens.
And the MTA doesn't even accept tokens anymore.
Wouldn't this have been better reported under Prof. Irina Manta's "Strangers on the Internet" posts?
Josh, I say this with love and respect: this is the dumbest thing you’ve ever posted, and hopefully the dumbest collection of thoughts that have ever danced through your head.
Blackman: “We’re only four days in. Hold my beer.”
1. On one hand, Josh's extra-stupid posts hurt my brain.
2. On the other hand, a lot of the comments in this thread (from both sides of the aisle) have been genuinely funny.
3. So, um, Good job, Josh???
I’m finding it hard to express the level of my interest in this subject.
Has anyone asked Mr. Manager why he wears his hair that way? His lack of concern about how his dress reflects on him probably impacts how others treat him.
And he really should smile more. He's pretty when he smiles.
We certainly don't want our Justices to be biased against evil!
I can see how that would be a problem for Josh's "courage in the face of morals, values, and principles" agenda.
Ever hear of Apples and Oranges?
I am sure if there is a case in front of Justice Jackson involving shell manufacturers, she would gladly recuse herself.
Is there any evidence that she was given this item and did not report it?
It’s not like wearing a piece of jewelry in a subtle protest, or even if it was to ward off evil spirts, is anything like taking undisclosed junkets in first class around the world.
Professor Blackman, if nothing but prolific if not proficient, should maybe just take a rest every now and then, and keep his righteous indignation to more worthy causes. “Just because you’re paranoid don't mean they’re not after you,” KDC.
The necklace protected us from her evil, so mission accomplished!
Just saying. Justice Thomas was not the first black justice to sit on the Supreme Court, either. If you are going to mention him, you should also mention Justice Marshall, no?
As for the significance of "female", neither Justice Thomas nor any of the male justices wear necklaces (or dissent collars). Now, if they wore MAGA hats and red ties (akin to Trump) and were asked about it, while Justice Jackson was not, perhaps we might have an issue.
You mean like he did? Or did he stealth edit it again?
Do people actually make a living as a "costume historian"?
I wouldn't be surprised at all. In addition to academia, I'm sure there's work in period TV, film, opera, etc.
The amount of detail required to accurately reproduce the look and feel of a specific time period is huge, and they'll often still get some minor details wrong.
In related news, Rep Jim Jordan has announced an impeachment inquiry into Justice Jackson's wardrobe.
"I don't know why she wore it. Presumably it was to show disdain for our new god king and my personal savior Trump. The people's overwhelming mandate will not be mocked! This is a high crime and she will be eliminated..I mean replaced" Jordan then made an awkward hand gesture resembling a nazi salute. To 'show his devotion for Trump from his heart.'
~Fin~
To the dumbest lawyer in Texas (with Joe_dallas a close second),
Your incredulity about a missing word in a sentence is truly remarkable, given that it was only two days ago that you wrote this:
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/01/21/how-presidents-theodore-roosevelt-and-ronald-reagan-responded-to-their-assassination-attempts/
To put it mildly, anyone who is receiving their legal education from you is getting conned; you're a fucking idiot.
Hey, now, bookkkeeper_Joe just claims to be a legal expert; he doesn't claim to be a lawyer. He is, however, the dumbest virologist in Texas.
That elicited quite the chuckle.
Thanks, David.
Arizona Proud Boys leader Joseph Biggs encouraged fellow rioter Ryan Samsel who picked up a metal barricade and smashed capitol policewoman Caroline Edwards over the head knocking her unconscious. She now suffers from permanent Traumatic Brain Injury. However, she routinely wears a thin silver chain necklace
Not a real injury in Josh-world.
I'm sure that if Clarence Thomas wore a necklace of cowrie shells it would be commented on.
Yeah, by transphobes.
"silence from the large newspapers and media outlets"
This is worse than the Rothschild Space Lasers conspiracy.
With all due respect Josh… you are not a serious person
I know that South Texas College of Law has all the hiring standards of a crack-addicted hooker, but do you think that all the other professors there laugh at him too?
Josh is angling so effing hard for a judgeship.
What an absolute joke that Reason publishes this illiberal vomit.
Good grief. What a juvenile example of cross-cultural, cross-racial and cross-gender ignorance. Once again: Josh doesn't actually know any black women.
This is like me (raised Catholic) going up to a Hasidic Jew and saying, "Those curls make you look like a girl!"
Did anyone who saw the headline not immediately know it was another Josh article?
I mean, I understand the desire for some light relief on these pages, but really?
It is somewhat interesting to read about the various possible meanings of her necklace. For instance, I saw something in Ebony.
https://www.ebony.com/justice-ketanji-brown-jacksons-cowrie-shells-a-powerful-nod-to-culture-heritage-and-protection/
(A quick Google media search also brought up articles in Vogue, Parade, MSN.com, and the Houston Chronicle)
The collar is an atypical showy fashion choice that she logically knew would get some attention. It's fine to talk about it some though again JB is probably not the best person to obtain a full understanding. Attire choices are cultural expressions of some note. For instance, hairstyles can also have certain meanings.
The coverage provides a range of interpretations so conclusions it is some sort of "talisman" seems questionable. It would seem best practice for the media that wrote about it to at least do due diligence and ask for a statement though I doubt one will be given.
I don't think there was any mystery as to why she would wear a necklace to ward off evil, she was surrounded by Congressmen, in their building.
I'm curious how the author of the correction knows Justice Jackson is female, when not even Justice Jackson herself can identify what a female is.
With incisive scholarship like this coming from its professors, I fail to understand why South Texas College of Law Houston isn't considered a Top 10 law school.