As Twitchy just reported, law professor Jonathan Turley has called the Murthy v. Missouri lawsuit being argued before the Supreme Court Monday as possibly "one of the most important free speech cases in the history of the Court." This is basically about whether the government can censor speech on social media, as we saw how it did when the Twitter Files were released. 

If there's one thing we learned from the pandemic, it was not to suppress dissenting opinions — say, on the COVID-19 virus having leaked from a lab, or the vaccine possibly having dangerous side effects. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson apparently learned nothing from that fiasco, looking ahead to the next pandemic:

We already had a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic, so we shouldn't have to worry now, should we?

Justice Jackson, who is not a biologist, expressed some concern about the First Amendment "hamstringing" the government.

Here's audio:

Exactly … to limit the power of the government over the people.

So, in cases where it's really important, the government should be allowed to censor speech.

Exactly.

But what if it's about something really important, like the next once-in-a-lifetime pandemic? Shouldn't the government be able to quash "disinformation" to protect the people from themselves? Maybe she wants to bring the Disinformation Governance Board back while she's at it.