Matt Walsh

The emotional response of children, regardless of what that response may be, does not override the First Amendment, nor does it override the responsibility of a health care practitioner to do the right thing and tell the truth.

Now, of course, we have plenty of evidence, not to mention common sense, which tells us that it's a terrible idea actually to affirm the delusions of children.

The ACLU's lawyer had to admit last year before the Supreme Court that they have precisely zero evidence that so-called gender affirming care actually reduces suicide rates, even though they constantly claim otherwise.

But again, whatever data or study you come up with, the truth is what matters.

And in a free country,

No one can be forced to affirm a lie, period.

Now, we all know what's going on here with this dissent.

This is yet another attempt, one of many.

to give the so-called experts a veto power over what Americans are allowed to say out loud.

First of all, even if the experts were always right about everything, which they aren't, this whole line of argument is un-American and unconstitutional.

So-called experts don't get to force other people to agree with them, which is what this law attempts to do.

And as we all know, these experts are some of the most corrupt, least trustworthy people on the planet.

Last year, as you may remember, the Daily Wire published footage of a private video call featuring the president of the AMA, which is a leading medical association on the planet.

And in that call, the president of the AMA made it very clear that the organization is basically a rubber stamp for other smaller organizations.

They're not actually vetting anything.

They'll endorse so-called trans medicine.

And then when they're asked about it, they'll claim total ignorance.

And when the president of the AMA was informed that these smaller organizations, organizations the AMA is relying on, are staffed by extremely biased activists, he just simply didn't care.

I won't go through everything else in Jackson's dissent, but I did want to mention this one paragraph as well, because it actually approaches an intelligent argument from Ketanji Brown Jackson.

And for that reason alone, it's historic.