Court Should Strike Down Compelled Speech In Website Design Case

Walter OlsonThe Supreme Court will hear oral argument today in one of its biggest First Amendment cases in years,303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. It is the latest – and should be among the easiest to resolve – of the many cases in which vendors have asserted First Amendment rights not to assist in same‐​sex weddings, notwithstanding state and local anti‐​discrimination law. Cato has filed on behalf of the small business owners’ rights in many of these cases includingMasterpiece Cakeshop andArlene ’s Flowers, as well as atearlierstages of this one. (Cato also filed in favor of the freedom to marry in cases such asWindsor andObergefell, there being no contradiction between the two stands. Let freedom ring for all.)As my colleagueDavid Boaz summarizes today ’s controversy at The Hill:Lorie Smith … owns a graphic design firm in Colorado and wants to expand her business to include wedding websites. ….As her brief to the Court says, “Smith will decline any request—no matter who makes it—to create content that contradicts the truths of the Bible.”Smith ’s faith is not mine. But like Voltaire, I fully defend her right to express her own ideas, and to refuse to express ideas she rejects. …[The] court ruled in the 1977 “Live Free or Die” license‐​plate case out of New Hampshire that forcing people to speak is just as unconstitutional as preventing or censoring speech….The Supreme Court has noted the First Amendment “includes both the r...
Source: Cato-at-liberty - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs