#tzedek

But think about what it means to pursue something. We pursue what we don’t have. Law enforcement pursues a criminal because the criminal has not yet been caught. A lover pursues the target of their affection because they are not currently in a relationship. We pursue happiness because we aren’t currently happy with our circumstances. If we had the thing, then we wouldn’t need to pursue it. “Tzedek, tzedek tirdof” focuses on the ACTION of pursuing justice, not the presumed end goal of having a society where you know without a doubt that things are just.

And thinking about this reminded me of a question I hear a lot in conversations about social justice issues. The question is, “When will it be enough?” When I talk with people about the need to have more movies starring people of different races and religions, I hear the question, “But how many diverse actors do we need to cast before we know we have enough representation?” Or when the conversation is about the need to use more accurate and inclusive language for people of different genders and sexualities, I hear the question, “But when will we know we’re saying the right thing that will include absolutely everyone?” These are just a few examples, but whether you’re talking about language, or hiring practices, or benefit programs and charity, someone always asks, “when will it be enough?” When will we have done enough? When will we finally get to stop thinking about this whole “making a better, safer, fairer and more just world” and just relax and enjoy life?

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, of blessed memory, once said that she was often asked how many of the court’s nine judges should be women. At what point would there be enough women on the bench? In response, Justice Ginsburg would always say, “When there are nine.” Now the person who asked her this question would be shocked by this answer. How could it be fair for all nine Supreme Court Justices to be women? To this, Justice Ginsburg replied, “When there were nine men, nobody raised a question about it.”

Justice Ginsburg’s answer points out the logical fallacy of the question. There is no “enough.” There is no completely ideal lineup of Supreme Court Justices who will definitely, completely, truly represent the best interests of all Americans. BUT – even though this perfect court is an impossibility – we SHOULD continually strive to make the Court MORE representative and MORE able to better serve all Americans, no matter what our heritage is, and provide justice for all.

Now, there are people in the United States who believe that we have already achieved a society with justice for all. But there are many other people who know from personal experience or from the experiences of their friends and family that this is not yet true. I think it’s a dangerous thing to believe that we already have justice, because if we believe we have it, then we won’t pursue it.

If we look at justice as something that we must pursue, then we open our eyes to the possibility we don’t have it. We open our eyes to discover the ways we are missing the mark. The creation of a just world is continual. I like to think about my two-year-old niece. I am driven to do my part to make sure that she grows up in a world which is good, kind, and fair. But I’m also looking forward to the day she comes to me and says, “Hey, Aunt Sophie, that thing you just said that you think is an okay thing to say? It’s actually harmful, and here’s why.” She will see the ways that I miss the mark, that I have fallen short of creating a community that is good, kind, and fair to everyone. And I am genuinely excited to find out what I could do better!