“Any woman who chooses to behave like a full human being should be warned that the armies of the status quo will treat her as something of a dirty joke.” – Gloria Steinem

“I have said many times, that there seems to be plenty of room in the world for mediocre men, but not for mediocre women, and we have to work very, very hard.” – Madeleine Albright

We are in awe of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Using only the shield of judicial temperament, the torch of knowledge, and the sword of her passion for the law, she withstood and finally defeated a 3-day siege of contempt and paternalistic disdain by the gaggle of hissing and pecking standard-bearers for the mediocracy on the Senate Judiciary Committee. It wasn’t really a fair fight; she has a resume’ that outshines them all and more than qualifies her to be a Supreme Court Justice. The fact that hers is a “historic” nomination is both an explanation for their frustration and hostility, and an invitation to delve into that history.

Questions must be asked. Why would those Senators act that way toward anyone, much less a respected professional? And why has this nomination taken so long: 50 years since the passage by a 2/3 majority of Congress of the Equal Rights Amendment that would outlaw discrimination based on sex; 58 years since the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act outlawing discrimination based on race; 102 years since the passage of the 19th Amendment outlawing voting discrimination based on sex; over 150 years since the ratification of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments guaranteeing (at least on paper) Black people equal rights and justice; and 230+ years since the ratification of the United States Constitution?

Unless one is prepared to argue that there have been no qualified Black women to nominate to the Supreme Court until this year, the only possible explanation is systemic discrimination. Discrimination is baked into our founding documents. For all their profoundly progressive idealism, the Founders didn’t really mean it when they wrote that “all men are created equal.” It wasn’t an oversight that “men” didn’t include Black men or any women. This is why white men have never had to argue before the Supreme Court that they shouldn’t be denied the Blessings of Liberty based on their race or sex. Women and members of other marginalized communities are all too practiced in making that argument, and the need is ongoing. Symptoms of systemic discrimination persist, and the fight against unequal pay, workplace harassment, exploitation of workers, domestic violence, discriminatory housing practices, and limited access to comprehensive health care continues.

We can forgive the Founders for their mistakes and will continue fighting to correct them, but there’s no excuse for the way Senators Cruz, Graham, Hawley, and Cotton behaved toward a sitting federal judge this week. The armies of the status quo welcome everyone who loves authoritarianism and fears being replaced, so there are women, including on this committee, happy to sling mud on their behalf, but those four men led the charge. They obviously felt entitled to interrupt, harass, and repeatedly shout lies about her judicial record. Senator Cruz is the same age as Judge Jackson and has no judicial experience, but still condescendingly mansplained (check your dictionary) judicial history to her. Senator Graham repeatedly interrupted and shouted at her, and finally slapped the desk in frustration when she persisted in explaining the law and the Constitutional separation of powers instead of taking his bait. Then he flounced out of the hearing in disgust. Others, completely untethered from any Constitutional moorings, did a good job of disproving the old saw that there’s no such thing as a stupid question. To paraphrase a few: do you support requiring Critical Race Theory in preschools? Why did you coddle pedophiles? Why won’t you define what a woman is? Could a Hispanic man just choose to identify as Asian? How often do you go to church? Anyone conducting this interview in any other venue should expect to be hauled to HR immediately, and pray not to be sued for harassment.

There is no excuse for them, but there are reasons. In part, their performance was just that–theater for their audience of right-wing ideologues running for office this year. They were even rewarded with encores on right-wing talk TV. But there is also an element of the mediocracy that understands historic events like these expose the falseness of the story they’ve told to explain their successes. The story is that America is a “meritocracy”: everyone gets what they deserve here based on skill and hard work; everyone has the same opportunities to reach their goals; there are no obstacles to anyone achieving the American Dream. In fact, the inequities in opportunity–exactly who qualifies to be included in the category of “all men”–have been the basis of Supreme Court decisions from the very beginning. White male privilege has created extra space in society for these mediocre men. Their squalling and fuming was the sound of their fear of being replaced by someone whose entire, exceptional journey challenges their sense of entitlement.

Compare their noise to the steadfast, measured strength of Judge Jackson. As only someone with truly judicial temperament does in the face of adolescent histrionics, she patiently explained, again and again, that the courts do not act in service to any political dogma, but in service to justice and the promise of the Constitution itself. It is the Constitutional role of Congress (Article I), not of the Judicial Branch (Article III) to make laws. Judges are constrained by the laws Congress passes. As a public defender, she represented those accused of crimes because she values the 6th Amendment, which requires that the accused have legal representation. As a judge, she used sentencing guidelines established by Congress. As a Justice, she will apply Constitutional principles and established law to determine the merits of all cases brought before the Supreme Court.

Judge Jackson is where she is because she is extraordinary, including in her love for America. She is here to help secure the blessings of liberty for herself and her posterity. She is devoted to the law and the Constitution because, for all their shortcomings, the Founders had a beautiful idea based on the inherent value of every individual, and they built a framework for a government where that idea could be realized. She understands that at its best, American justice isn’t a set of beliefs: it is a way to find the truth in service to the ongoing project of creating “a more perfect union.” Everyone owes her, and all those on whose shoulders she stands, a debt of gratitude for fighting so hard for us.

Jean Lewandowski is a resident of Nashua. Visit Jean McIntyre Lewandowski’s Facebook page for more and to offer feedback.