[The Editors' Verdict] Like Ginsburg and Scalia

As the Constitutional Court Nears a Verdict on Yoon’s Impeachment
Hoping for a “Beautiful Ruling”
That Unites Us Beyond Factions
Under the Constitution

If we were to rank the popularity of all U.S. Supreme Court justices in history, it would be fitting to place the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away several years ago, at the forefront. Known as an 'icon of progressivism,' she was like a pop star. Young people roamed the streets wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the photo of the octogenarian justice’s face and her initials (RBG). Americans loved Ginsburg not only because she sided with minorities and the vulnerable through rulings such as 'women’s admission to military academies' and 'equal pay for equal work.'

In 2016, Justice Scalia, who passed away earlier, demonstrated the reason personally in his eulogy for Ginsburg. "What differed between us was our interpretation of the law, but what we shared was reverence for the Constitution. The opinion I issued incorporating Scalia’s dissent was much better than the draft." Scalia was the leader of the conservative bloc on the Supreme Court. Although Ginsburg once said in a media interview that she sometimes wanted to 'strangle him to death,' the two were sharp adversaries in court but close friends for 40 years personally. Ginsburg practiced compromise and tolerance by respecting Scalia to the end despite their differing opinions and seeking common goals together.

Therefore, the main piece of the opera inspired by the two justices was titled 'We Are Different but One.' Scalia also revealed to the media how he could become friends with his 'archrival' Ginsburg. "I attack the opponent’s ideas, not the person. The problem is that even such a good person (Ginsburg) sometimes has bad ideas."

The reason for bringing up this often-cited story is because of the situation our judiciary faces. Many worry about the 'judicialization of politics' going beyond into the 'politicization of the judiciary.' Those facing Supreme Court trials first consider the ideological leanings of the presiding justice, and parties in constitutional court cases are busy counting how many conservative and progressive justices there are. However, the author believes that our judiciary also breathes the tradition of compromise and tolerance, and the wisdom of discussion and seeking common ground while preserving differences (求同存異).

On the third floor of the Constitutional Court, in the justices’ conference room which is less than forty pyeong (approx. 132 square meters), there is a large round table. It is a Harkness table named after the sponsor of a U.S. private high school famous for discussion classes, and there is one in the Supreme Court’s 15th-floor conference room where all justices meet. The reason for having a round table, neither square nor oval, is to encourage unrestricted debate and discussion. Whether in conference or full bench meetings, having junior justices speak first is a device designed to prevent 'rank,' 'seniority,' or 'age' from hindering discussion.

One constitutional justice described the conference room atmosphere as 'a battlefield without gunfire,' and said that justices address each other by courtesy names to prevent emotions from clouding logic. Rumors such as 'a certain justice stormed out of the conference room' or 'profanity ran rampant during the conference' have circulated... but conflicts never crossed the threshold of the Constitutional Court. A nearby pufferfish restaurant next to the Constitutional Court wall was a favorite after-hours gathering spot for the justices. They said, "We quench our thirst and also ease our grievances."

After the 10th hearing of President Yoon Suk-yeol’s impeachment trial on the 20th, it will be purely 'the Constitutional Court’s time.' When Ginsburg visited Korea in 2015 and was asked, "Is it right for unelected justices to exert strong influence on society?" she replied, "That is the tradition of the U.S. Supreme Court, and it has maintained the country with the trust of the people." We hope that our constitutional justices, too, will transcend factional conflicts and create a beautiful ruling that unites everyone under the 'Constitution,' just as Ginsburg and Scalia did.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.