Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Only with listening can justice be applied properly

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson answers questions during her March confirmation hearings.

China News Service/Getty Images

Thomas is an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Indianapolis and a public voices fellow through The OpEd Project.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has made history as the first Black woman confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Both her confirmation hearings and her history as a judge underscore a larger issue: Justice can’t exist without listening.

The hearings brought the brokenness of the proceedings to light, with many speaking over her and failing to listen. This reflects, in particular, a profound misunderstanding of the procedures necessary to uphold the legitimacy of the judicial system. Listening is an underemphasized pillar of justice. While many people might think of the judicial system as a mechanism of distributive justice (allocating rewards and punishments appropriately), procedural justice (fair process and treatment) can serve as a stronger motivator of law-abiding behavior in its citizens.


In her opening speech, Jackson said her nearly 600 written legal decisions tend to be lengthy because she is committed to transparency. She stated she wants “each litigant to know that the judge in their case has heard them, whether or not their arguments prevail in court.”

Yale law professor Tom Tyler has demonstrated through his scholarship that most people obey the law not because of perceived consequences, but because they believe the laws to be fair and legitimate.

When people feel fairly treated, through respectful processes and listening practices, they legitimize authorities. This legitimacy can happen even when people disagree with the distributive outcome as long as the process feels fair.

Transparency and voice are pillars of justice, and important predictors of legitimacy attributions in a wide range of studies.

The appointment of a justice who takes great care in providing transparency and procedural justice will strengthen the legitimacy of the courts at a time when the perception of the Supreme Court is at an all-time low. The appointment of a Black female, especially one who is committed to practices of transparency and procedural justice, has the potential to increase public legitimacy of the Supreme Court. A recent Gallup poll gave her the second highest approval rating, behind only Chief Justice John Roberts.

If the judicial sentence is distributed correctly, but if the process is botched, it will not feel like justice. And the perception of justice matters. Research shows that the perception of justice in one’s personal life drives motivation, well-being, feelings of safety and positive future orientation.

A disproportionate amount of hearing time was spent on browbeating the nominee over whether she is tough enough on crime. While this is arguably a flawed perspective shaded by race, it is also a short-term, fear-mongering focus that does not take into account the role that justice practices and adequate representation can play in legitimizing the system itself. When a system is deemed legitimate and people feel heard, they are more likely to abide by a social contract. The role of procedural justice in shaping legitimacy is critical at this point in American history.

Fostering a just society also means creating systems that are considered legitimate by the people who live under them. There is a popular narrative that tough sentencing deters crime. In short, it absolutely does not, likely because criminals don’t weigh their future in the same way policy writers do. Legitimizing legal authorities does improve compliance with the law. Thus, a system that practices listening increases people’s perception of the legitimacy of the system. Most importantly, it deters crime.

Through my years of studying justice perceptions in the family, school and legal authorities in Brazil, Kenya, and the United States, I have come to understand justice as a form of capital that is not equally distributed. Justice capital can be increased by authorities who listen and grant citizens a voice. When judges institute practices of listening, they are increasing one’s individual access to justice and strengthening the legitimacy of democratic judicial institutions.

Above all, listening grants humanity and a level of respect that will be the surest way to strengthen our justice system and ensure a stable, legitimate democracy because, as the old adage goes, people remember how they are treated. And they most certainly remember when they feel as if they have been heard.


Read More

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

US Capitol and South America. Nicolas Maduro’s capture is not the end of an era. It marks the opening act of a turbulent transition

AI generated

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

The U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro will be remembered as one of the most dramatic American interventions in Latin America in a generation. But the real story isn’t the raid itself. It’s what the raid reveals about the political imagination of the hemisphere—how quickly governments abandon the language of sovereignty when it becomes inconvenient, and how easily Washington slips back into the posture of regional enforcer.

The operation was months in the making, driven by a mix of narcotrafficking allegations, geopolitical anxiety, and the belief that Maduro’s security perimeter had finally cracked. The Justice Department’s $50 million bounty—an extraordinary price tag for a sitting head of state—signaled that the U.S. no longer viewed Maduro as a political problem to be negotiated with, but as a criminal target to be hunted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red elephants and blue donkeys

The ACA subsidy deadline reveals how Republican paralysis and loyalty-driven leadership are hollowing out Congress’s ability to govern.

Carol Yepes

Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis

Picture a bridge with a clearly posted warning: without a routine maintenance fix, it will close. Engineers agree on the repair, but the construction crew in charge refuses to act. The problem is not that the fix is controversial or complex, but that making the repair might be seen as endorsing the bridge itself.

So, traffic keeps moving, the deadline approaches, and those responsible promise to revisit the issue “next year,” even as the risk of failure grows. The danger is that the bridge fails anyway, leaving everyone who depends on it to bear the cost of inaction.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House
A third party candidate has never won the White House, but there are two ways to examine the current political situation, writes Anderson.
DEA/M. BORCHI/Getty Images

250 Years of Presidential Scandals: From Harding’s Oil Bribes to Trump’s Criminal Conviction

During the 250 years of America’s existence, whenever a scandal involving the U.S. President occurred, the public was shocked and dismayed. When presidential scandals erupt, faith and trust in America – by its citizens as well as allies throughout the world – is lost and takes decades to redeem.

Below are several of the more prominent presidential scandals, followed by a suggestion as to how "We the People" can make America truly America again like our founding fathers so eloquently established in the constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money and the American flag
Half of Americans want participatory budgeting at the local level. What's standing in the way?
SimpleImages/Getty Images

For the People, By the People — Or By the Wealthy?

When did America replace “for the people, by the people” with “for the wealthy, by the wealthy”? Wealthy donors are increasingly shaping our policies, institutions, and even the balance of power, while the American people are left as spectators, watching democracy erode before their eyes. The question is not why billionaires need wealth — they already have it. The question is why they insist on owning and controlling government — and the people.

Back in 1968, my Government teacher never spoke of powerful think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, now funded by billionaires determined to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Yet here in 2025, these forces openly work to control the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court through Project 2025. The corruption is visible everywhere. Quid pro quo and pay for play are not abstractions — they are evident in the gifts showered on Supreme Court justices.

Keep ReadingShow less