SCOTUS - A Lone Dissent—and a Warning for America
The recent Supreme Court decision in Chiles v. Salazar has once again placed before the American public a critical question: who ultimately controls speech in this country—the citizen or the state? In this case, eight members of the Court concluded that Colorado violated the First Amendment when it attempted to prohibit a Christian counselor from engaging in conversations with clients who voluntarily sought guidance consistent with their faith and convictions. Standing alone in dissent was Ketanji Brown Jackson. Her dissent argued that the state has broad authority to regulate licensed professionals and therefore may restrict certain forms of speech when they occur within the context of counseling. But this reasoning opens a troubling door. If the government can regulate speech simply because it occurs between a counselor and a client, then what remains of the First Amendment’s protection for free expression? Once the state claims authority over what may be said in private c...