#News #USA #Scotus The only decent human being in there.
In a solo dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that states should be free to regulate health care, even if that means incidental restrictions on speech. The decision, Jackson wrote, “opens a dangerous can of worms” that “threatens to impair states’ ability to regulate the provision of medical care in any respect.”
KBJ misunderstood the facts of the case, that the other eight understood.
This was emphatically NOT about incidental restrictions on free speech. Had it been then the opinion would have likely gone the other way.
This was about direct censorship of disfavored speech, not incidental restriction.
This is an instance where being the outlier is a pretty good indicator that maybe the person misunderstands what they're looking at.
It's just nuts to say this opens such a can of worms. She might as well have been talking about the implications of our living on a flat earth.
