The Supreme Court rules in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis that the First Amendment bars Colorado from forcing a website designer to create expressive designs speaking messages with which the designer disagrees.
The majority ruling was based on First Amendment free speech grounds.
The progressive media, LGBTQ+ activist fundraising lobbies, and Democratic party politicos claim that the ruling is a frontal attack on LGBTQ+ rights and allows businesses to discriminate against LGBTQ+ clients. But the ruling does not permit businesses to refuse LGBTQ+ customers overall; it’s clearly targeted at allowing providers to refuse requests for services that involve the creation of explicit communications that violate the provider’s beliefs.
It is often necessary to balance conflicting rights. LGBTQ+ activists and Democratic party officials want to use the state to force small business owners to engage in expressive activity that violates their religious or otherwise deeply held beliefs. The court rightly told them to desist. (Edited to clarify that the decision was based on freedom of speech, not religious freedom, grounds.)
2. the govt shouldn’t be able to force people to say something they disagree with. Those who liken this case to denial of service at restaurants/hotels during Jim Crow either don’t understand public-accommodations laws or are disingenuous to score cheap political points—or both.— Ilya Shapiro (@ishapiro) June 30, 2023
NPR reports the Supreme Court "narrowed LGBTQ rights." Another way to put it would be "affirmed First Amendment rights."— David Boaz (@David_Boaz) June 30, 2023
WaPo: "The vote split along ideological lines 6 to 3, with the liberals in dissent." If they don't back free speech, are they really liberals?— David Boaz (@David_Boaz) June 30, 2023