Well, it seems like the Supreme Court’s liberal justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, is trying her hand at breaking into the celebrity scene. Justice Jackson recently attended the Grammys, where she seemed quite at ease applauding anti-ICE rhetoric. Maybe she’s eyeing a side gig in Hollywood, but what happened to maintaining judicial impartiality? After being nominated for best audiobook—an award she didn’t win—Jackson diverted from her day job to partake in the festivities of the rich and famous. This makes one wonder if she’s using her platform to influence more than just legal opinions.

Now, some might say that Justice Jackson is simply engaging with culture, but doesn’t this pose a question of conflict of interest when it comes to upcoming immigration cases? Conservative commentators suggest if the Democrats’ standards apply, maybe Justice Jackson should take a step back from cases involving ICE. After all, if vacations and flags are grounds for recusal, surely a round of applause at an event like the Grammys should raise eyebrows.

It’s amusing to witness the double standards at play here. The left often demands recusals from conservative justices for seemingly mundane reasons, yet there’s radio silence when it comes to one of their own. The Grammys are known for their prevalence of liberal ideology—Tyler Perry’s acquisition of a military base is lamented for not swinging the other way—and it appears Justice Jackson fits right in with that crowd. While enjoying the limelight, has she forgotten the need for judicial decorum that conservatives like Clarence Thomas heed?

Even with all this, Jackson seems to enjoy hearing her own voice, boasting an impressive count of over 76,000 words spoken in oral arguments in just one Supreme Court term. That’s twice as much as her colleagues. Perhaps she believes the more she talks, the more she’s heard. But as the newest justice, perhaps a little less talking and a little more listening might serve her well. It raises concerns about her style, which some critique as leaning more activist than analytical.

So, perhaps it’s not too soon for Justice Jackson to reflect on how her public appearances and verbose courtroom exchanges align with her judicial responsibilities. As cases that could affect millions of Americans make their way to the Supreme Court, her involvement in culture wars may cloud decisions where impartiality is critical. Let’s hope she remembers that her role is more about upholding the Constitution than mingling with Hollywood’s elite.