Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson used Gen Z slang in her concurring opinion for the landmark birthright citizenship case Tuesday.
Jackson authored a scathing rebuke of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissenting opinion, using the phrase “understood the assignment,” which is commonly referenced on social media by Gen Z and TikTok users. Jackson was siding with the court’s 6-3 decision to uphold birthright citizenship, which automatically grants individuals born on American soil United States citizenship. (RELATED: Supreme Court Shoots Down Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order)
“In the aftermath of the Civil War, those who championed the Fourteenth Amendment — both within and beyond Congress — understood the assignment,” Jackson wrote. “Their work product used ‘language that transcended race and region,’ and thereby ‘changed and broadened the meaning of freedom for all Americans.’”
“Instead of the limited salve the principal dissent makes it out to be, the Citizenship Clause reflects this universalist approach.”
Jackson, who was nominated by former President Joe Biden, ultimately sided with Supreme Court Justices John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Amy Coney Barrett.
WASHINGTON, DC – SEPTEMBER 20: Ketanji Brown Jackson speaks on stage during the “Ketanji Brown Jackson on Lovely One: A Memoir” panel for The Atlantic Festival 2024 on September 20, 2024 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Paul Morigi/Getty Images for The Atlantic)
Jackson has used unorthodox phrases to add personality to her Supreme Court opinions before. During the 2025 term, Jackson authored the dissenting opinion in the Trump v. CASA case, which the Court ruled, 6-3, cannot allow lower courts to issue universal or nationwide injunctions. (RELATED: Oversight Project Charts Path Forward To Combat Birthright Citizenship)
In her opinion, Jackson tried a Gen Z rhetorical flourish to argue that the executive, not the district courts, was guilty of government overreach.
“As I understand the concern, in this clash over the respective powers of two coordinate branches of Government, the majority sees a power grab — but not by a presumably lawless Executive choosing to act in a manner that flouts the plain text of the Constitution,” Jackson wrote. “Instead, to the majority, the power-hungry actors are… (wait for it)… the district courts.”
Jackson was in the minority in this case, siding with Sotomayor and Kagan.