I just wish they wouldn’t use the term “conversion therapy” for two very different things: trying to talk people out of being gay, and trying to talk people into accepting their actual sex. It’s yet another example of falsely conflating LGB with T. Very different phenomena!
She points out that the Colorado law not only regulates the content of speech, but also favors one viewpoint over another. The Supreme Court has held that laws that favor one viewpoint over another necessarily violate the First Amendment.
I regard this as significant, and it may have relevance in the detransitioner court cases. I have inside info on one of them, that, as usual, the doctors' defense team stall for time. It won't help. Hey, Amy Sousa does Facebook posts wearing XX-XY! Brava to all.
This is excellent news! Thank you, Jennifer for breaking it down in non-legalese and also to The EZ Rider for Justice Kagan’s opinion as despite all the footnotes, I found that easy to understand and very reasonable. What has troubled me about this law and gender affirming care overall for minors is how can they fully understand what they are consenting to? I’m sure this is the case in all states, but here in New York, a minor cannot consent to any medical procedure, even routine ones like an x-ray, because they would not fully understand the possible risks. So, that same minor patient who is not allowed to consent to have an x-ray after a turned ankle playing soccer can consent to have procedures like puberty blockers or surgery on genitalia? Please….
Amazing news. It was an 8-1 decision, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson as the sole dissenter in this clear cut First Amendment case. One dissenter.
Although, during her nomination hearings, she said she couldn’t define what a woman was, so is it any wonder that one of the bedrock principles of democracratic governance also alludes him, er, her?
👏👏👏 Thank you to the Supreme Court for ruling 8-1 in favor of Kaley Chiles in Chiles v. Salazar! Kaley Chiles is NOT practicing conversion therapy! She is asking important questions to help children figure out who they really are before subjecting themselves to life-altering surgery that will cause irreversible damage to their bodies later in life that they will regret. Actual conversion therapy telling a gay person their sexuality is wrong and they need to change, I think we can all agree is deplorable and should be illegal. But that’s not what Kaley Chiles is doing. She asks kids crucial questions that they need to think about in order to get to a place where they feel they understand themselves.
No one here is saying gender-affirming care is altogether bad. For adults, I have no problem with it. But not for minors! Children are too young to understand the weighty decision they are making or the future ramifications of it. What if they are gay? What if they just behave or dress in a way that is not typical for their gender? What if they are just going through a phase? This is a huge win for free speech, parents and children! I also applaud the Supreme Court’s rulings in Phillips v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission and 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. A Christian baker shouldn’t be forced to bake a cake for a gay couple nor should a wedding site designer be forced to design a website for gay couples. That is their decision in a free society like the United States! Also, I’m sorry I can’t resist Jennifer, but your name will always remind me of that duet Michael Jackson and Paul McCartney did back in the 1980s “say, say, say.”
So many people are confused about these laws that affect the free speech rights of therapists, and the choices of clients to pursue the direction of therapy according to their own wishes, not the mandates of the state. And of course they are confused, because they have been lied to about “conversion therapy.”
Justice Jackson's entire argument rests on her claim that talk therapy is medical treatment. Did no-one explain to her the difference between a psychiatrist and a psychotherapist?
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued that the ruling could expose minors to harmful practices?
It's a good thing we don’t allow one Supreme Court Justice to define "harmful practices" for the entire country. Besides, what could be more harmful — in the true sense of the word — than "gender-affirming care"?
I just wish they wouldn’t use the term “conversion therapy” for two very different things: trying to talk people out of being gay, and trying to talk people into accepting their actual sex. It’s yet another example of falsely conflating LGB with T. Very different phenomena!
But of course that's why they started using the term in the first place!
KBJ provides her usual “insight.” Hard to believe she will be on the Supreme Court for life.
Usually I appreciate and understand perspectives I disagree with, pretty much impossible with KBJ.
Thank you for making the explanation clear to understand. This helped me. 🩷
Kagan's concurrence, joined by Sotomayor, is short and worth reading:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/24-539#writing-24-539_CONCUR_5
She points out that the Colorado law not only regulates the content of speech, but also favors one viewpoint over another. The Supreme Court has held that laws that favor one viewpoint over another necessarily violate the First Amendment.
I regard this as significant, and it may have relevance in the detransitioner court cases. I have inside info on one of them, that, as usual, the doctors' defense team stall for time. It won't help. Hey, Amy Sousa does Facebook posts wearing XX-XY! Brava to all.
This is excellent news! Thank you, Jennifer for breaking it down in non-legalese and also to The EZ Rider for Justice Kagan’s opinion as despite all the footnotes, I found that easy to understand and very reasonable. What has troubled me about this law and gender affirming care overall for minors is how can they fully understand what they are consenting to? I’m sure this is the case in all states, but here in New York, a minor cannot consent to any medical procedure, even routine ones like an x-ray, because they would not fully understand the possible risks. So, that same minor patient who is not allowed to consent to have an x-ray after a turned ankle playing soccer can consent to have procedures like puberty blockers or surgery on genitalia? Please….
Amazing news. It was an 8-1 decision, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson as the sole dissenter in this clear cut First Amendment case. One dissenter.
Although, during her nomination hearings, she said she couldn’t define what a woman was, so is it any wonder that one of the bedrock principles of democracratic governance also alludes him, er, her?
Huge win!
1. For a non lawyer this was a great, and very readable summary.
2. You were too kind to Justice Brown.
3. Colorado is a great example of a gorgeous, formally mostly deep purple state, that has been infiltrated by the Communists.
Common sense !
👏👏👏 Thank you to the Supreme Court for ruling 8-1 in favor of Kaley Chiles in Chiles v. Salazar! Kaley Chiles is NOT practicing conversion therapy! She is asking important questions to help children figure out who they really are before subjecting themselves to life-altering surgery that will cause irreversible damage to their bodies later in life that they will regret. Actual conversion therapy telling a gay person their sexuality is wrong and they need to change, I think we can all agree is deplorable and should be illegal. But that’s not what Kaley Chiles is doing. She asks kids crucial questions that they need to think about in order to get to a place where they feel they understand themselves.
No one here is saying gender-affirming care is altogether bad. For adults, I have no problem with it. But not for minors! Children are too young to understand the weighty decision they are making or the future ramifications of it. What if they are gay? What if they just behave or dress in a way that is not typical for their gender? What if they are just going through a phase? This is a huge win for free speech, parents and children! I also applaud the Supreme Court’s rulings in Phillips v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission and 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. A Christian baker shouldn’t be forced to bake a cake for a gay couple nor should a wedding site designer be forced to design a website for gay couples. That is their decision in a free society like the United States! Also, I’m sorry I can’t resist Jennifer, but your name will always remind me of that duet Michael Jackson and Paul McCartney did back in the 1980s “say, say, say.”
So many people are confused about these laws that affect the free speech rights of therapists, and the choices of clients to pursue the direction of therapy according to their own wishes, not the mandates of the state. And of course they are confused, because they have been lied to about “conversion therapy.”
Kid: I’ve really felt like I should be an amputee. My left arm is so ugly. I don’t like it.
Therapist: Great! Let’s get a saw!
We truly have sauntered into loonyville when this has to be argued in front of the Supreme Court.
It’s remindful of when lobotomies were the soup du jour for housewives who were in an emotional malaise back in the 1950’s and 60’s.
Justice Jackson's entire argument rests on her claim that talk therapy is medical treatment. Did no-one explain to her the difference between a psychiatrist and a psychotherapist?
Given that she doesn’t know the difference that makes a woman, not a man, I’d say that distinction is a bridge too far to expect of her.
I cannot believe Ketanji Brown Jackson sits on SCOTUS. It's a disgrace.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued that the ruling could expose minors to harmful practices?
It's a good thing we don’t allow one Supreme Court Justice to define "harmful practices" for the entire country. Besides, what could be more harmful — in the true sense of the word — than "gender-affirming care"?