Mike Steger
At this point Ketanji Brown Jackson isn't just a legal embarassment. She is a total communist patsy for very sinister forces. She is more akin to a Tiergarten Vier Nazi Jurist than a misguided liberal. And that distinction matters, since her odious arguments will continue to stink up our sacred Supreme Court worse than a port-a-potty in August at a chilli-fest.
In her dissent in Chiles v. Salazar and Colorado, a case about the right to counsel minors on sexual identity regarding their best mental health--she argues the right to practice medicine is subordinate to the police power of the state.
Her opening line:
"[T]here is no right to practice medicine which is not subordinate to the police power of the States." Lambert v. Yellowley, 272 U.S. 581, 596 (1926). This was true 100 years ago, and it should be true today.
The counselor in this current case, Kaley Chiles, does not prescribe any medicines, perform any physical treatments, or engage in any coercive or aversive practices. All she offers is talk therapy.
KBJ reaches back to Prohibition. A case about whiskey. Using alcohol to deliver medicine, or medicine to deliver alcohol. She ignores the free speech element, and focuses on state control of medical care. She is horribly wrong on both, and a threat to national survival.
A Court Against Free Speech
The 20's was not a great period for the court.
Continue reading …
At this point Ketanji Brown Jackson isn't just a legal embarassment. She is a total communist patsy for very sinister forces. She is more akin to a Tiergarten Vier Nazi Jurist than a misguided liberal. And that distinction matters, since her odious arguments will continue to stink up our sacred Supreme Court worse than a port-a-potty in August at a chilli-fest.
In her dissent in Chiles v. Salazar and Colorado, a case about the right to counsel minors on sexual identity regarding their best mental health--she argues the right to practice medicine is subordinate to the police power of the state.
Her opening line:
"[T]here is no right to practice medicine which is not subordinate to the police power of the States." Lambert v. Yellowley, 272 U.S. 581, 596 (1926). This was true 100 years ago, and it should be true today.
The counselor in this current case, Kaley Chiles, does not prescribe any medicines, perform any physical treatments, or engage in any coercive or aversive practices. All she offers is talk therapy.
KBJ reaches back to Prohibition. A case about whiskey. Using alcohol to deliver medicine, or medicine to deliver alcohol. She ignores the free speech element, and focuses on state control of medical care. She is horribly wrong on both, and a threat to national survival.
A Court Against Free Speech
The 20's was not a great period for the court.
Continue reading …
No comments:
Post a Comment