Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has disclosed receiving a $2 million advance from Penguin Random House for her memoir ‘Lovely One,’ published in early September. This follows a $893,750 payment in 2023, bringing her total earnings from book deals over two years to nearly $3 million.
The memoir, named ‘Lovely One’ for its reference to Jackson’s West African birth name, traces her family’s ascent from segregation to her confirmation on the Supreme Court within one generation, as described by Amazon. The book’s release has been followed by an extensive book tour, with stops in major cities across the United States, including San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, Miami, and Atlanta. Travel, food, and lodging expenses related to the tour were reimbursed by Penguin Random House.
The Supreme Court recently adopted a formal ethics code regarding the acceptance of free travel and gifts, yet there is no current cap on earnings from book deals. This issue has become more prominent as several justices, including Jackson, Barrett, Gorsuch, and Sotomayor, recently recused themselves from a case involving the parent company of Penguin Random House, Bertelsmann. The case, which did not involve a direct conflict of interest, was likely recused due to the potential implications for the ethics of the justices and the broader judicial process.
The justices’ decision to step aside from the case, which involved the German company Bertelsmann, which owns the publishing house that has published or will be publishing their books, was not accompanied by an explanation. An ethics expert suggested the move was likely due to the case’s involvement with the company that owns the publishing house. The situation raises questions about potential conflicts of interest among the justices and the broader implications for judicial ethics. The case highlights the challenges the Supreme Court faces in balancing personal financial interests with the responsibilities of a judicial position.
Despite the ethical scrutiny, the memo has been widely received by critics and supporters both. Some argue that the publication of a memoir by a Supreme Court Justice is an example of their right to express their personal stories as any citizen. Others, however, argue that the significant financial transactions involved raise questions about whether the Justices are appropriately separated from the public they serve. The situation continues to draw attention to the intersection between personal financial interests and judicial duties, as well as the broader implications for public trust in the judiciary.