The Early Years and Formative Experiences

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was born Joan Ruth Bader on March 15, 1933, in Brooklyn, New York, to Jewish immigrant parents who fled persecution in Eastern Europe. Her father, Nathan Bader, worked as a furrier, while her mother, Celia Amster Bader, was a gifted student who was denied a college education because her family prioritized her brother’s schooling. Celia instead worked to save money for Ruth’s future, instilling a fierce independence and a belief that education was the key to a meaningful life. Celia’s own experience with gender and economic discrimination left an indelible mark on Ruth, who later described her mother as “the strongest influence in my life.” After Celia died of cancer the day before Ruth’s high school graduation, Ginsburg carried her mother’s advice to be independent, to value learning, and to fight for what is right.

Growing up in a working-class Jewish neighborhood during the Great Depression and World War II, Ginsburg witnessed the deep inequities that existed in American society. Her family’s synagogue, Congregation Beth Elohim, emphasized social justice, an ideal that would shape her legal philosophy. She attended James Madison High School, where she was a strong student, though she was also known for her quiet determination and sharp intellect.

Education at Cornell and Law School Challenges

Ginsburg attended Cornell University on a full scholarship, graduating in 1954 with a bachelor’s degree in government. At Cornell, she met Martin D. Ginsburg, a witty and supportive fellow student who would become her husband and a lifelong partner. Martin would later become a leading tax attorney and fierce advocate for his wife’s career, managing family responsibilities so she could pursue law. The couple married shortly after her graduation, and Ruth gave birth to their daughter, Jane, while still in law school.

She enrolled at Harvard Law School in 1956 as one of only nine women in a class of more than 500 men. The environment was openly hostile: a dean asked each female student why they were taking a place that could go to a man. Professors sometimes refused to call on women, and the library’s women’s restroom was hidden in a basement. Despite these obstacles, Ginsburg excelled academically, becoming the first woman to serve on the Harvard Law Review. She also cared for her husband, who had been diagnosed with testicular cancer during her first year, typing his class notes as he recovered. When Martin’s job took them to New York, she transferred to Columbia Law School, where she again made history by being the first woman elected to the Columbia Law Review. She graduated first in her class in 1959, yet no law firm would hire her because of her gender. As she later recalled, “I was a woman, a mother, and a Jew. That was a triple strike.”

A Career Forged in Advocacy

Academic Positions and the Women’s Rights Project

Despite her stellar academic record, Ginsburg struggled to find a clerkship. After several rejections, Judge Edmund L. Palmieri of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York hired her based on the recommendation of a professor. She then worked as a research associate and associate director of the Columbia Law School Project on International Procedure, which helped her develop expertise in comparative law. In 1963, she joined the faculty of Rutgers Law School, where she experienced salary discrimination—she discovered she was paid less than male colleagues. That experience deepened her commitment to gender equality.

In 1972, Ginsburg co-founded the Women’s Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The project was designed to establish through careful litigation that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits discrimination based on sex. She argued six landmark gender-discrimination cases before the Supreme Court between 1973 and 1979, winning five of them. Her strategy was to choose cases with sympathetic plaintiffs, including men who had been denied benefits due to outdated gender stereotypes, to show the broad harm of discrimination.

Landmark Cases Before the Supreme Court

Ginsburg’s litigation strategy was deliberate and incremental. In Reed v. Reed (1971), she co-authored the brief that persuaded the Court to strike down an Idaho law preferring men to women as estate administrators—the first time the Court applied the Equal Protection Clause to invalidate a gender-based law. Her first oral argument before the Court was in Frontiero v. Richardson (1973), where she argued that gender-based classifications should be subject to strict scrutiny. Although the Court did not adopt that standard, it ruled in her favor. In Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld (1975), she represented a widower who was denied Social Security survivor benefits for his child because the law assumed only men were breadwinners. The Court unanimously struck down the gender-based distinction.

Her most famous victory came in Craig v. Boren (1976), which established the intermediate scrutiny standard for gender-based laws, requiring the government to show an “exceedingly persuasive justification” for such classifications. This standard became the bedrock of modern gender equality jurisprudence. Ginsburg also argued Califano v. Goldfarb (1977), where she successfully challenged a law that gave widowers fewer benefits than widows. By framing these cases as matters of individual rights and human dignity, she transformed the Court’s understanding of equal protection.

Appointment to the D.C. Circuit

President Jimmy Carter appointed Ginsburg to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1980. Over the next 13 years, she developed a reputation as a careful, moderate jurist who prioritized reasoned analysis over ideology. Her opinions often displayed a measured incrementalism, preferring narrow rulings that could achieve broad acceptance. For example, in National Organization for Women v. Scheidler (1991), she dissented from a ruling that hindered the use of RICO statutes against anti-abortion protesters, arguing that the majority had misread congressional intent. She also wrote influential opinions on administrative law, such as Sherman v. Community Consolidated School District 21 (1985), which required school districts to provide appropriate educational services for children with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Her judicial temperament and intellectual rigor earned her praise from both liberal and conservative colleagues.

The Supreme Court Years

Confirmation and Early Tenure

President Bill Clinton nominated Ginsburg to the Supreme Court in 1993 to replace retiring Justice Byron White. The Senate confirmed her by a vote of 96–3, reflecting her broad bipartisan appeal. She was the second woman ever appointed to the Court, following Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. In her confirmation hearing, Ginsburg carefully avoided answering hypothetical questions, citing the judicial canon against prejudging issues. Her early opinions showed a commitment to precedent and judicial restraint, but over time she became more willing to vigorously dissent when the Court shifted to the right.

Key Majority Opinions

Ginsburg wrote several influential majority opinions. In United States v. Virginia (1996), she struck down the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admissions policy, holding that the state must demonstrate an “exceedingly persuasive justification” for gender-based classifications. This opinion solidified the standard she had helped create in Craig v. Boren. In Olmstead v. L.C. (1999), she interpreted the Americans with Disabilities Act to require community-based services for individuals with mental disabilities, a landmark ruling for disability rights. Her opinion in Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. (1995) upheld arbitration agreements but required clarity in waiving punitive damages, balancing consumer protections with contract enforcement. She also wrote for the majority in Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc. (2000), which preserved citizen-suit provisions under environmental laws, allowing private parties to enforce pollution regulations.

The Art of the Dissent

As the Court grew more conservative, Ginsburg frequently found herself in dissent. Her dissents were carefully crafted and sometimes read from the bench to signal deep disagreement. In Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (2007), she dissented from the Court’s ruling that a woman’s pay discrimination claim was time-barred. She painstakingly detailed the realities of workplace discrimination and famously said, “The ball is in Congress’s court,” urging legislative action. Congress responded by passing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, the first bill signed by President Barack Obama. Her dissent in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), which gutted a key section of the Voting Rights Act, was widely cited. She wrote, “Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.” In Bush v. Gore (2000), she authored a powerful dissent arguing that the Court had intervened in a way that undermined democratic processes. Her dissents became rallying points for activists and helped cement her cultural icon status.

Judicial Philosophy and Impact

Gender Equality and the Constitution

Ginsburg believed that the Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection must be applied dynamically to remedy systemic discrimination. She argued that gender discrimination was harmful not only to women but also to men and society as a whole. Her jurisprudence gradually moved the Court toward a more robust understanding of equality, influencing later decisions such as Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which legalized same-sex marriage. While she did not author the opinion, her prior writings on dignity and equal protection provided intellectual foundation. She also saw equality as intertwined with liberty; as she once said, “Women’s rights are not about being superior to men, but about being equal.”

Voting Rights and Civil Liberties

Ginsburg consistently defended voting rights, the separation of powers, and individual privacy. She dissented in Bush v. Gore (2000) and in several cases that weakened campaign finance regulations, such as Citizens United v. FEC (2010). Her vote in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016) helped strike down Texas abortion restrictions, though she did not write the majority opinion. She also supported religious liberty claims when they aligned with antidiscrimination principles, as seen in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014), but dissented when the majority’s ruling allowed employers to deny contraceptive coverage based on religious objections. In health care, she upheld the Affordable Care Act in NFIB v. Sebelius (2012) and King v. Burwell (2015).

Influence on American Jurisprudence

Ginsburg’s impact extends beyond her votes. Her careful, incremental approach to gender equality shaped the Court’s jurisprudence for decades. Law clerks, judges, and scholars continue to study her advocacy strategy as a model for social change litigation. She also influenced the culture of the Court itself, advocating for more women and minorities in the legal profession. Her friendship with Justice Antonin Scalia, despite ideological differences, demonstrated that collegiality could coexist with vigorous disagreement. They co-authored several opinions and shared a love of opera, even appearing together in a walk-on role in Ariadne auf Naxos at the Kennedy Center. Her commitment to rigorous legal reasoning and her belief in the law as a force for good serve as a permanent example.

Cultural Legacy and Continuing Inspiration

The Notorious R.B.G.

In the 2010s, Ginsburg became a popular culture phenomenon. Nicknamed “Notorious R.B.G.” after the rapper Notorious B.I.G., her image appeared on T-shirts, mugs, and tattoos. The nickname was popularized by Shana Knizhnik, a law student, and has since become a symbol of determined advocacy. Documentaries such as RBG (2018) and the feature film On the Basis of Sex (2018) introduced her story to a wider audience. She was known for her collars—a lacy jabot for majority opinions, a black and gold dissent collar for strong disagreements. Her workout routine, maintained even during cancer treatments, was widely admired and made her a fitness icon. Her visibility inspired a generation of young women and men to pursue law, activism, and public service.

Inspiring Future Generations

Ginsburg’s life story remains a powerful example of perseverance and principle. She faced gender discrimination, serious health challenges (including multiple battles with colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, and lung cancer), and personal loss—her beloved husband Martin died in 2010. Yet she continued to work until her death on September 18, 2020, on the eve of Rosh Hashanah. Her legacy is carried forward by the more than 100 law clerks she mentored, many of whom now hold influential positions as judges, professors, and advocates. The ACLU Women’s Rights Project continues to litigate the issues she pioneered. Law students study her oral arguments as models of clarity and persuasion. Her papers are housed at the Library of Congress, available to researchers. Each year, the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lecture at Cornell Law School honors her contributions, and the National Women’s Hall of Fame inducted her in 2022.

Conclusion

Ruth Bader Ginsburg reshaped American law and society. From her early struggles to attend law school as one of a handful of women to her final years as the senior liberal justice on the Supreme Court, she remained steadfast in her belief that the law must protect the dignity and equality of every person. Her judicial opinions, dissents, and advocacy work form a lasting blueprint for social justice. Her influence will be studied and celebrated for generations to come. As she once said, “Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time.” That step-by-step approach, executed with brilliance and grace, has left an indelible mark on the Constitution and on the conscience of a nation.