NY Times, Sept. 22, 2020
Amid the Outpouring for Ginsburg, a Hint of Backlash
By Jennifer Schuessler
The internet had learned to love Ruth Bader Ginsburg, so it was
not surprising that when the news of her death broke on Friday
evening, social media lit up with outpourings of love and
admiration for this diminutive octogenarian who had been cast as
an iron-pumping, dissent-slinging legal ninja.
But those who celebrated her as a one-woman bulwark against the
collapse of democracy might have been surprised by something
else that bubbled up. Within hours of her death, there also
appeared more than a little snarking about the pop-hagiography
around her, edged with insinuating questions about just how
far-ranging her vision of equality was.
Some noted her poor record of hiring Black law clerks and her
comments in 2016 (which she later apologized for) calling Colin
Kaepernick’s national anthem protests “dumb” and
“disrespectful.”
Others re-upped longstanding critiques of R.B.G.-mania, and
perhaps even of the judge herself, as reflecting a myopic “white
feminism.” On Twitter, there were calls to remember those “left
behind” by the brand of feminism Justice Ginsburg supposedly
advanced, along with mocking references to the public grief over
her death as a “white women’s 9/11.”
“What conception of women’s rights, and what kind of feminist
movement, might have died with Ginsburg?,” Melissa Gira Grant
wrote in The New Republic, questioning what she called “the
false idea of Ginsburg as liberal or feminist savior.”
The whiff of a backlash reflects longstanding tensions within
feminism, as a movement sometimes criticized for being
symbolized by, and primarily serving, middle-class white women
has been challenged by a perspective that emphasizes the
interplay of race, class, gender and other factors. It’s a
tension that has only grown amid the Black Lives Matter protests
of the past summer, as some have questioned whether a highly
empowered older white woman ensconced in an elite institution
was a fit hero for the moment.
But some who share the broader critique of feminism say that
seeing Justice Ginsburg as a symbol of a blinkered white
perspective is as reductive as an R.B.G. sticker.
“As a Black person, I definitely would have liked to see her be
more forward thinking on racial justice issues over the past few
years,” Imani Gandy, senior editor for law and policy at Rewire
News and co-host of the “Boom! Lawyered” podcast, said. “But
denigrating her as an out-of-touch white feminist is a real
disservice.”
“There’s this weird demonization vibe that’s really blowback
from a lot of the R.B.G. feminist cult-icon stuff that she
didn’t ask for,” she said.
Justice Ginsburg’s towering reputation as a legal thinker rests
on work she pioneered in the 1970s, through the American Civil
Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project, which she co-founded.
In a string of landmark cases, she successfully challenged the
Supreme Court’s view that the equal protection clause of the
14th amendment guarded only against racial discrimination, but
permitted sex discrimination (which was often justified as being
for women’s own good).
But her fan culture is of much more recent vintage, and springs,
paradoxically, from her defeats, rather than her victories. In
2013, Justice Ginsburg issued a blistering dissent in Shelby
County v. Holder, denouncing the Court’s invalidation of central
portions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 on the grounds that
they were no longer necessary “like throwing away your umbrella
in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.”
The dissent, which Justice Ginsburg read aloud from the bench,
drew an electric response. The digital strategist Aminatou Sow,
and the designer Frank Chi posted stickers reading “You Can’t
Spell Truth Without Ruth” around Washington. The dissent also
set off an explosion of online memes, cataloged in the Notorious
R.B.G. Tumblr account started by Shana Knizhnik, a law student.
The journalist Irin Carmon, who, with Ms. Knizhnik, wrote a 2015
book inspired by the Tumblr account, said that Justice Ginsburg
became famous as a “symbol of dissent” as much as of feminism,
and that the meme culture was not just about her, but about what
she was calling attention to.
“And it’s always been important that the genesis was Shelby
County,” she said. “As important as her women’s rights work was
her broader commitment to equal justice and civil rights.”
Ms. Sow, now an author and host of the podcast “Call Your
Girlfriend,” said that some criticisms of the tote-bag version
of R.B.G. fandom were warranted. “It speaks to a real laziness
in our culture to elevate people and think you’ve done the
work,” she said.
But she pushed back against what she said were facile critiques
of Justice Ginsburg’s legal work as “white lady” feminism.
“The reason so many young people get to be blasé or cool” by
trashing Justice Ginsburg’s record as insufficiently radical, or
overly tied to institutions and incremental change, she said,
“is that she created this world where people are free to do
that.”
“She seems like this older relic,” Ms. Sow, who is 35,
continued. “But the point of being a trailblazer is she gets to
age into a world where people my age don’t have to remember how
hard it was. I mean, not too long before I was born, women
couldn’t even get a credit card.”
Some legal scholars argue that Ginsburg’s work, particularly as
a litigator, was more intersectional — a term the legal scholar
Kimberlé Crenshaw coined in 1989 to describe the complex ways
gender, race and other aspects of identity interact — than is
commonly acknowledged.
Melissa Murray, a professor at New York University Law School
who focuses on family law and reproductive justice, noted that
Justice Ginsburg’s first brief filed to the Supreme Court, in
the 1971 case Reed v. Reed, also credited as co-authors the
African-American legal scholar Pauli Murray and the leftist
feminist Dorothy Kenyon, who had pioneered the legal theories
she drew on.
“She was always very explicit in her career about giving
appropriate deference and respect to the role of Pauli Murray,
who was not only an African-American jurist, and largely
forgotten until recently, but also a queer woman,” Professor
Murray said.
Justice Ginsburg’s cases as a lawyer, including a 1973 challenge
to North Carolina’s forced sterilization program, often involved
working-class or poor plaintiffs, including women of color.
Professor Murray also noted a little-known amicus brief that
Ginsburg co-wrote in a 1977 Supreme Court case challenging the
constitutionality of a Georgia law allowing the death penalty
for rape.
That brief, filed while she worked at the A.C.L.U., addressed
the unequal application of the law in cases of Black men
convicted of raping white women, criticizing it for reinforcing
both patriarchal and racist ideas by treating white women as the
property of white men and Black men as dangerous interlopers.
“It’s a real rebuke to people who argue her feminism did not
take account of race,” Professor Murray said. “It very clearly
did, in a profound way.”
Fatima Goss Graves, the president and chief executive of the
National Women’s Law Center, also questioned any implication
that Justice Ginsburg, either as a lawyer or a judge, had
represented an elitist vision of equality.
In her dissents, Ms. Goss Graves said, Justice Ginsburg
repeatedly chided the Court for failing to understand how
discrimination worked in the real world. She noted what turned
out to be Justice Ginsburg’s last dissent, issued in July, in a
contraceptive case, which argued that the court’s ruling would
leave many poor women unable to afford birth control.
“She was deeply unafraid to name the many problems with the
decisions coming out of the majority, and to do it in a way that
put the lives of regular people forward,” Ms. Goss Graves said.
The parsing of Justice Ginsburg’s full legal legacy will be a
project of decades. But in the more immediate term, debates
about her suitability as a rallying point and icon may have less
to do with her than with the limited cultural space granted to
“great” women, who have been as rare in our acknowledged public
pantheon as on the Supreme Court.
“Individuals who come to bear representative weight are always
going to embody contradiction and imperfection,” Rebecca
Traister, a writer for New York magazine and the author of “Good
and Mad: The Revolutionary Power of Women’s Anger,” said. “Those
who become symbols can be so easily torn down.”