Liberal Justices Baffled By Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Solo Dissent In ‘Textbook’ Free Speech Case

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson couldn’t get a single colleague to join her dissent warning of “catastrophic” fallout from upholding a Christian counselor’s free speech rights.

The Supreme Court found 8-1 Tuesday that Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy” was viewpoint discrimination against Kasey Chiles, who was barred under the law from offering talk therapy encouraging gender-confused kids to feel comfortable in their bodies.

“Ultimately, because the majority plays with fire in this case, I fear that the people of this country will get burned,” Jackson wrote in her 34-page solo dissent.

“It is baffling that we could now be standing on the edge of a precipitous drop in the quality of healthcare services in America,” Jackson wrote. “But the Court sees fit to bring us one step closer to that fate today. Stranger still is the fact that this possibility looms in the 21st century—given what science now enables us to know about medical conditions and treatments, what our cases say, and what we all should have learned by now from history.”

While Jackson worried the decision would open the door to unraveling the entire medical system, Justice Elena Kagan called her out for “reimagining” settled First Amendment law.

First Amendment protections apply no matter what view the state takes, Kagan noted in a concurring opinion joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

“Consider a hypothetical law that is the mirror image of Colorado’s,” she wrote. “Instead of barring talk therapy designed to change a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity, this law bars therapy affirming those things. As Ms. Chiles readily acknowledges, the First Amendment would apply in the identical way.”

Kagan, who called Chiles’ case a “textbook” example of viewpoint discrimination, pointed out the court’s opinion does not address “content-based but viewpoint-neutral laws.”