Biden’s pick for the Supreme Court might have no idea what she’s doing. The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued an 8–1 decision strengthening First Amendment protections for talk therapy, striking down Colorado’s ban on so-called “conversion therapy” as applied to a Christian counselor working with minors.
In a majority opinion, the Court found the law engaged in viewpoint discrimination by allowing certain perspectives in counseling sessions while prohibiting others. The ruling sided with Kaley Chiles, a licensed counselor who challenged the restriction on providing exploratory talk therapy to minors seeking to address questions about sexual orientation and gender identity, noted The Daily Caller.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter.
In a 34-page opinion, Jackson warned of sweeping consequences for the healthcare system, arguing the Court’s reasoning could undermine medical regulation. She described the majority’s decision as a dangerous departure, writing that the Court was “playing with fire” and that “the people of this country will get burned.” She also raised concerns about a “precipitous drop in the quality of healthcare services in America,” contending the ruling conflicted with modern scientific and legal standards.
No other justice joined her opinion.
Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, filed a separate concurrence agreeing with the outcome while rejecting Jackson’s broader warnings. Kagan described the Colorado law as a “textbook” example of viewpoint discrimination and emphasized that the First Amendment applies regardless of which side of a debate the government restricts.
Kagan also pushed back directly on Jackson’s reasoning, offering a hypothetical law banning therapy that affirms gender identity while permitting the opposite approach. The constitutional analysis, she noted, would be the same—highlighting what she characterized as a misreading of established distinctions between viewpoint-based and content-based regulations.
While concurring in the judgment, Kagan and Sotomayor signaled skepticism toward Jackson’s claims that the ruling would render medical regulation “effectively unregulatable.” Kagan pointed to examples cited in the dissent, suggesting they illustrated the continued viability of content-neutral regulations rather than their collapse.
It’s not the first time Jackson has been called out by her fellow justices. In 2025 she was mocked by Amy Coney Barrett for not having the basics of the law down.
The majority opinion, authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, reaffirmed that the First Amendment prohibits the government from favoring one viewpoint over another in speech, including in the context of counseling. The Court returned the case to lower courts to apply strict scrutiny to the Colorado law as it affects Chiles’ practice.
[Read More: Trump Demands Congress Get Back To Work]
Jackson can’t even define what a woman is. She should be impeached for incompetence.