So i come home after driving all day returning from a half-marathon when I open my feed to see Brown-Jackson of SCOTUS claim that she's "bothered" that the First Amendment is inhibiting the government from "interacting" with speech *it determines* to be harmful.
I had to listen to the comment a few times because I thought maybe she had been taken out of context or the way she was speaking made it look like she was saying one thing (pauses can do that) but really was saying something else.
Nope.
She had responded to a solicitor suggesting, correctly, that the government can make it's own speech. Her commentary about the First Amendment made it clear that she did not believe it is good enough that the government can speak. No, she's concerned that some other speech by citizens, could be deemed problematic by the government...let me stop here.
The minute "that the government determines" popped out of her mouth she should have paused HERSELF given the gravity of the train of thought she was embarking on. Also, I seriously believe that the OTHER JUSTICES should have given audible gasps and yes, interfered with her question at that point. But I heard no such thing. I can only hope she gets put on blast in the decision, whichever way it goes.
But I am not surprised by this from Brown-Jackson. Not in the least bit. I said she had disqualified herself when she boldly lied about not knowing what a woman is. It was a bold faced lie. It was a clear sign that she was willing to put ideology ahead of facts if that was what required to get where she wanted.
That the senate approved of her appointment is a stain on their already nasty grimy garment that is their reputation. That answer ALONE should have resulted in her removal from consideration and WOULD HAVE a mere 10-15 years ago.
Now Brown-Jackson (and no doubt others) are looking for an end run around the First Amendment so they can censor just as Google removed my factual post about a report on myocarditis following "vaccine" doses. They just want to declare a swatch of speech "harmful" and "conspiracy" and then censor it and punish those who dare speak the "unspeakable".
There are those saying Brown-Jackson should be impeached over this. I would agree but as I said earlier, The senate approved of her even after her bald faced lie. And those senators were put into office by the voters. Inevitably, Jackson's commentary reflects a rather large percentage of the electorate.
That is the true rot.