John Roberts, the 64-year-old Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, made a meme reference for the ages when he invoked the phrase “Okay, boomer” during oral arguments in a case about federal age discrimination and civil rights.
According to Vice, Roberts was discussing a hypothetical example of potential age discrimination during oral arguments for Babb v. Wilkie when he dropped the meme reference. While the news organization maintains that the court “killed the meme,” they nonetheless note that Roberts drew laughter with his example.
“Let’s say in the course of the, you know, weeks’ long process, you know, one comment about age, you know, the hiring person is younger, says, you know, ‘okay, boomer,’ you know, once to the — to the applicant,” Roberts said to laughter, reports the news agency. “Is that actionable?”
The phrase “Okay, Boomer” experienced an explosion of popularity in late 2019 as a way to refer to out-of-touch behavior exhibited by elderly people, who may or may not in fact be part of the Baby Boomer generation.
For example, Ben Shapiro, the editor-in-chief of the Daily Wire, used the phrase to jokingly refer to Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) after she enthusiastically told an interviewer last November that she liked to “Netflix and Chill.”
“Pretty sure she doesn’t know what that means,” said Shapiro. “It doesn’t mean you only watch Netflix. Over the last several years, that term has morphed fairly significantly. But she’s with the people! Okay, Boomer.”
According to the Associated Press, Stephen Breyer, the 81-year-old liberal justice who is not actually a Baby Boomer but a member of the Silent Generation, also drew laughter in the courtroom after he made a joke about his own age.
“I certainly don’t want people who are over the age of 82,” said Breyer, who was discussing an hypothetical promotion from the perspective of a hiring manager.
The Supreme Court case, which concerns the Federal Age Discrimination Employment Act of 1967, has began drawing attention because of its potential to have widespread implications across the federal government.
As summarized on SCOTUSBlog, the court will decide whether a person alleging age discrimination from a federal employer must prove that age was merely a factor in an employment decision, or if it was the sole factor, and the decision would have been different “but for” the age discrimination.
Dr. Norris Babb, the clinical pharmacist for the Department of Veteran’s Affairs at the heart of the legal battle, says that she was overlooked for a promotion due to a number of factors, including her age.
A potential ruling in favor of Babb could result in public sector employees having to prove a less strict standard in discrimination cases than private sector employees. Notably, while the “language of the laws” for the public and private sectors differs, AP reports the court ruled eleven years ago that age must be the deciding factor when determining if unlawful discrimination has occurred in the private sphere.
The Supreme Court is not expected to issue a ruling on the case until June 2020.