Have you heard? Notorious RBG is totally a UX writer.

Well. Kind of. Let me explain.

If you know me, you know I'm a big Ruth Bader Ginsburg fan. From her work as a lawyer with the ACLU establishing women's rights in the 70's to her kickass workout routine to Kate McKinnon's bizarrely freewheeling impression, there's a lot there to love.

So much, that her fans honored her with push-ups in costume for her birthday this year. Really. (Photo by Susan Walsh for the AP.)

Recently I read her first book since she was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1993, In My Own Words, written with Mary Hartnett and Wendy W. Williams. It's a collection of essays, speeches, and accompanying commentary, and it's a telling window into her life and career.

In it, she covers the workings of the court and her judicial perspective, but she also drops some serious knowledge about the role writing plays on the Supreme Court. Here's some of her wisdom. It's why I'm naming RBG an honorary UX writer. (I'm pretty sure this is legally binding.)

 Words paint pictures.

 RBG learned to write from the best. At Cornell (go Big Red!) she encountered an English teacher who shaped her life and career.

 She recalls, "Vladimir Nabokov changed the way I read and the way I write. Words could paint pictures, I learned from him."

 Now, don't get it twisted—"painting pictures" isn't about artistry, it's about persuasion. To create understandable opinions or products, you've got to leave your jargon-y professional bubble, and make your thinking clear as day. To do that, you've got to use understandable examples and imagery.

"Get it right. Keep it tight." -Literally RBG said this.

 ^This is her motto, and it's true because it rhymes.

 RBG is all about concision in her decisions. In her confirmation hearing remarks, she quoted Justice Byron R. White. He hoped "the Supreme Court's mandates will be clear and crisp, leaving as little room as possible for disagreement about their meaning."

 This is like, usability for judges.

 As in law, ambiguity in an interface is a killer. You have limited space, and your audience has even more limited patience. If you over-explain, you can create more confusion than clarity.

 RBG knows the way. Read your words over and over. Search for misinterpretations. Have other people poke holes in them. Then, make them stronger.

 "It will come out in the writing." - Chief Justice Rehnquist

RBG notes that Justices will often make one argument during discussion, but then find that "it won't write." In other words? The act of writing can change your own mind.

Whether you've got a UX writer or a Justice in the room, you're inviting in a total change of plans. Writers take tasks that sound simple and reveal complexities lurking underneath. Finding the right words is a natural sharpening stone for strategy.

All that said, even Supreme Court Justices aren't above cross-functional compromise. RBG notes,

"[Chief Justice Hughes] always tried to write his opinions logically and clearly, but if another justice whose vote was necessary to make a majority insisted that particular language be put in, in it went, and let the law schools figure out what it meant!"

 Word.

She keeps it human.

When RBG was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1993, she had only a few hours to prepare her remarks. President Clinton knew she was his pick, but was watching a basketball game that ran into overtime so didn't call her until 11:30pm the night before (thanks, Bill).

You might expect that one of the world's top legal minds would write in a style that's dry or heartless. But the next day in the Rose Garden, her speech brought the audience to tears with its clarity and humanity.

"I have a last thank you. It is to my mother, Celia Amster Bader, the bravest, strongest person I have known, who was taken from me much too soon. I pray that I may be all that she would have been, had she lived in an age when women could aspire and achieve, and daughters are cherished as much as sons."

A few words, with so much meaning. Let's all aspire to write like RBG. We may not be able to influence the law, but we can all keep it tight.