U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson made a bold fashion choice at the recent presidential inauguration, donning a distinctive collar made of cowrie shells. The event, held in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on January 20th, captured the attention of many onlookers and sparked a debate about the symbolism behind her accessory.
The cowrie shell collar, a striking departure from traditional judicial attire, raised questions about the deeper meaning behind Justice Jackson’s sartorial statement. According to sources like HuffPost and Ebony, cowrie shells hold significant cultural value in African traditions, symbolizing prosperity, protection, ancestral wisdom, womanhood, and fertility.
Fashion experts and legal scholars weighed in on the collar’s significance, offering contrasting perspectives on its interpretation. While some, like Josh Blackman, initially dismissed the accessory as a “fashion faux pas,” others, such as fashion historian Shelby Ivey Christie, praised its visual impact and cultural resonance. Christie noted that the shell collar represented a reinterpretation of the traditional judicial jabot through an African American cultural lens, embodying ceremony, significance, and intentionality.
The diverse meanings associated with cowrie shells led to speculation about Justice Jackson’s intentions in wearing the collar. Publications like Vogue, Ebony, and The Root suggested that the accessory could be a sartorial expression of dissent, drawing parallels to the iconic dissent collars worn by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Ginsburg, known for her bold statements through fashion, used her collars as a form of protest and resistance, particularly in response to political events like Trump’s election in 2016.
However, not everyone viewed the collar in a positive light. Blackman expressed concerns about the potential talismanic meaning of the cowrie shells, suggesting that their association with protection from evil could raise ethical questions about judicial impartiality. While there is no definitive evidence to suggest that Justice Jackson intended to convey such a message, the mere appearance of impropriety is enough to warrant scrutiny, as Blackman highlighted in his post on the Volokh Conspiracy.
In the midst of this fashion debate, social media users took to platforms like Twitter to share their thoughts on Justice Jackson’s bold choice. Many praised her for embracing her cultural heritage and making a powerful statement through her attire, while others expressed caution about the potential implications of wearing symbolic accessories in a judicial setting.
As the discussion continues to unfold, one thing is clear: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s cowrie shell collar has sparked a dialogue about the intersection of fashion, culture, and symbolism in the highest echelons of power. Whether it was a mere fashion statement or a deliberate act of dissent, her choice of accessory has captured the imagination of observers and raised important questions about the role of symbolism in the judiciary.
