A supreme idea: More female justices for the high court

As Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was lying in state at the U.S. Capitol last month, so that our country could bid her farewell, institutionalized sexism was on full display.

Ginsburg, the second woman to serve on the Supreme Court, became the first woman, ever, to be honored in this way.

At total of 33 men have lain in state at the Capitol throughout U.S. history. It is a rare posthumous tribute, dating back to 1852 and usually reserved for government officials. Honoring a woman in this way seems a tad overdue.

The irony is unmistakable: In Ginsburg’s view, men and women deserved equal treatment under the law and equal opportunities in society. The fight against sexism — in our most fundamental matters, such as education, workplace discrimination and reproductive rights — was Ginsburg’s life’s work.

President Donald Trump’s selection of Amy Coney Barrett to succeed Ginsburg on the court will preserve the 33 percent ratio of female justices (three women, six men). This assumes that Barrett is confirmed by the Republican-controlled Senate, of course, which seems like a sure bet.

Should we all cheer the decision? After all, it would seem to ensure that three women will continue to sit on the Supreme Court.

I don’t feel like cheering. It strikes me that the high court has an arbitrary glass ceiling of sorts: three seats reserved for women, but no more. Why not more?

Ginsburg herself was often asked when there will be enough women on the Supreme Court. She would respond matter-of-factly: “When there are nine.”

People were invariably shocked, Ginsburg said.

Yet, for decades, no one ever raised a question about a court that was comprised of nine men. That was always considered normal.

For all the progress we have made as a country, we still expect men to hold positions of power. They’re the Supreme Court justices, the religious leaders, the corporate CEOS and the board chairs.

According to the American Bar Association, women now make up more than half of the enrollment at our nation’s law schools, a trend that began in 2015. As these women gain experience, we would expect them to ascend to more leadership positions — in the judiciary, at law schools and in private law firms.

Yet, an increase in the number of women attending law schools doesn’t necessarily translate to women having more power in the legal field.

According to a 2017 Mckinsey survey, fewer than one in five partners at law firms are women (even though they comprise 45 percent of the associates), and women are 29 percent less likely to reach the first level of partnership compared with men. Women earn 80 percent of what their male counterparts earn, even though the professional expectations are the same — or greater.

The obstacles are even bigger for women of color. Irma Gonzalez succeeded despite the odds she faced as a female, Mexican American law school graduate in the 1970s.

She is a retired federal judge, appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California in 1992 — and proudly, the first Mexican American woman to be named to the role. Gonzalez agrees: The courts need more women, she says, and more people of color to better reflect the constituency they serve.

Gonzalez credits her father, in part, for her drive to succeed.

Expectations were high for all seven Gonzalez siblings — and no different for the girls than for her brother.

Throughout her career, Gonzalez was mentored by men. So, too, was Ginsburg. Her collection of letters in the Columbia Law School archives includes correspondence with valued colleagues, mentors and friends — mostly male. Barrett was mentored by the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

It seems “men’s work” is to champion women: to buoy their growth and development, and offer wisdom and support. It’s one way to dismantle institutionalized sexism and allow more women to succeed and lead.

After all, more than half the U.S. population (50.8 percent) is female. By my calculation then, the Supreme Court is short two women.

Maybe we should limit the number of male justices, until women catch up. Men who are unhappy with this remedy — or feel unfairly sidelined — can turn to women for guidance. Because there’s no doubt: Women have had plenty of experience being overlooked.