WASHINGTON, D.C. — As the United States Supreme Court issued a decisive ruling on a controversial case in Colorado regarding conversion therapy for minors, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson raised a pertinent question about the constitutionality of the law.
The court handed down an 8-1 decision to strike down the law that sought to ban "conversion therapy" for minors, leaving Justice Jackson to question how a law could possibly be ruled unconstitutional if she liked it so much.
"If I like what it says, then that means it should be a law, right?" Jackson reportedly asked her colleagues on the court, according to transcripts. "I mean, laws are just things we like that we want to make everybody do, right? Is that what it means? So, like, if there's something that I think is nice and I want everyone else to agree with me, I just say it's a ‘law,' right? That's what I always thought. I don't know. I don't really remember them talking much about law stuff when I went to law school."
The court reportedly took a 15-minute recess during its deliberation so Jackson's fellow liberal justices could give her a rudimentary explanation of what terms like "law" and "unconstitutional" mean. "It's always a great learning opportunity for her," said one court insider. "Every case brings up something else she doesn't understand. Last month, we spent an hour telling her what a ‘court' is."
At publishing time, Justice Jackson had reportedly asked the other justices if it was unconstitutional for them to make her put away her iPad during oral arguments.
Do you think you can guess which one is the terrorist?
