Cooper Feiner

May 31, 2022

Every time a Supreme Court Justice leaves the bench, a frenzy arrives as the United States waits anxiously to see who the replacement Justice will be. The new Justice, once nominated by the President and approved by a simple majority vote in the Senate, has the potential to serve and influence policy for decades to come. Associate Justice William Douglas served for 36 years and 211 days, making him the longest serving Supreme Court Justice. Current longest serving Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has been serving on the nation’s highest court since being appointed in 1991.

We are all aware of the large policy impacts Supreme Court Justices can have, which is why recent court appointments have striven to make the court look more like the people it represents. Currently (pre-Justice Breyer’s upcoming retirement), there are three women, two people of color (one Black man and one Latina woman), and two Jewish Supreme Court Justices.[i] What has not changed in recent years is how most of the Supreme Court Justices have had the privilege of an Ivy League education. Biden’s new Supreme Court nominee (and potentially, by time of publishing, Justice) Ketanji Brown Jackson follows in their footsteps as a graduate of Harvard Law School.

Currently, all but one of the Supreme Court justices are Ivy League graduates. Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kavanaugh went to Yale Law School. Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Breyer, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kagan attended Harvard Law, with Karan not only attending but serving as the school’s first female dean. And finally, the one outlier of a justice who has not attended an Ivy League, recent appointee Justice Amy Coney Barrett graduated from Notre Dame Law School.[ii]

I am in no way suggesting that studying at our nation’s most prestigious law schools should not be considered an achievement, or worse yet, should remove you from consideration to the court. These institutions are responsible for sculpting some of the nation’s finest legal minds. Getting through any of these rigorous programs should surely be a sign of success and future success within the legal world. What I am suggesting, however, is that in a nation attempting to make the court look more like the rest of us, having a court dominated by two schools in the northeast of the United States less than 150 miles away from one another poses questions about that perceived diversity. Not only does it mean that justices are being educated by similar professors that two universities choose to hire, but they are also only being exposed to the viewpoints of the people who attend those universities.

While Ivy Leagues have set themselves apart for their academic rigor, they have also set themselves apart in their financial cost. Harvard Law School is, as of 2021, $70,430 a year to attend.[iii] Yale Law School is $96,575 a year to attend.[iv] Both figures are close to the average married family’s combined yearly income of $82,000. Scholarships by their very nature are limited and hard to attain, often requiring years of studying that may involve costs such as tutoring for standardized tests and essay writing that many families cannot afford. By limiting our Supreme Court Justices to simply Ivy League graduates, we are also limiting to the few people who have the privilege of attending these institutions.

Biden, to his credit, did have Judge Michelle Childs on his shortlist of potential nominees. She attended the University of South Florida as an undergraduate and University of South Carolina School of Law.[v] For comparison, the in-state cost of attendance at that institution is $23,722 a year.[vi] One could attend the University of South Carolina Law School for all three years for approximately the same cost as attending Harvard Law School for one year. This is a staggering difference. Judge Childs even had the apparent support of fellow South Carolinian Republican Lindsay Graham.[vii] In Biden’s quest for an appointee to the court, he will need all the support he can get with such a slim majority. Judge Childs has also served in a Federal District Court for over a decade and is currently being considered as a nomination to the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Despite this, Biden went with equally well qualified Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

In the United States, we function on a system of equal protection under law which is enshrined in our constitution. This means that every citizen, no matter their race, gender, ethnicity, religion, or class, is entitled to the equal protection of the law. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what the law is and how it should be interpreted. How can a court which only descends from two of the most prestigious, most expensive law schools feel it can relate to the plight of the working class or even the middle class? Many famous cases that have changed the way the U.S legal system works were brought to the court by people without economic means. Until 1963, there was not guarantee of a public defender in criminal trials. That case was brought up by Clarence Gideon, who could not afford a lawyer, and so easily lost his court battle against a much more experienced attorney. In prison, Gideon wrote his writ of habeas corpus, which the Supreme Court agreed to hear. For the hearing ,they appointed Gideon Abe Fortas, a prominent lawyer who argued and won the case. Through this case, those less fortunate showed the impact they too could have in the legal system. While it is of course important for the court to be made up of extremely intelligent judges, it should also be concerned with the relatability to the American People.

If we would like our courts to look more like us, then we need to consider factors in addition to race, religion, and gender. While the court should of course always strive to contain the best legal minds, the best legal minds might not have been able to afford an Ivy League education. There is also the potential that they developed into an outstanding legal mind in their professional careers and not necessarily in their education. All of this should be considered in order to not only get a court that represents the United States, but perhaps more importantly, to get a court which the people of the United States accept.

---

[i] “Current Members.” Home – Supreme Court of the United States, https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx.

[ii] Gresko, Jessica. “Supreme Court Shouldn’t Be Covered in Ivy, 2 Lawmakers Say.” AP NEWS, Associated Press, 1 Feb. 2022, https://apnews.com/article/stephen-breyer-joe-biden-us-supreme-court-law-schools-lindsey-graham-f7c3968b6a956ab36b8523d490fe9f4e.

[iii] Harvard Law School. “LL.M. Tuition and Financial Aid.” Harvard Law School, https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/graduate-program/llm-tuition-and-financial-aid/.

[iv] “Cost of Attendance.” Yale Law School, https://law.yale.edu/admissions/cost-financial-aid/cost-attendance.

[v] Green, Erica L., and Rick Rojas. “A Product of Public Universities, Michelle Childs Would Be an Unconventional Court Pick.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 9 Feb. 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/09/us/politics/michelle-childs-supreme-court.html.

[vi] “Tools & Resources.” University of South Carolina, https://sc.edu/study/colleges_schools/law/admissions/financial_aid/tution_and_fees/index.php.

[vii] Christinawilkie. “GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham Predicts That Supreme Court Prospect J. Michelle Childs Would Win More than 10 Republican Votes.” CNBC, CNBC, 14 Feb. 2022, https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/13/supreme-court-gop-senator-says-michelle-childs-would-get-60-votes.html.

[viii] “Facts and Case Summary – Gideon v. Wainwright.” United States Courts, https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-gideon-v-wainwright.