Barring any surprises, today is the last opinion day for this term of the Supreme Court, and it has started off with a doozy:
we have the first decision. It is 303 Creative and it is written by Gorsuch.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 30, 2023
‘Written by Gorsuch’ is a good sign most of the time. Not 100% of the time, but most of the time.
...It is a victory for free speech. Three dissenting justices. https://t.co/jJc00UNq0A
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 30, 2023
Gee, I wonder which ones dissented??🙄
— KatCorn (@KatCornay) June 30, 2023
The three Democrat appointees, if you were unsure.
"The First Amendment envisions the United States as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands. Colorado cannot deny that promise consistent with the First Amendment."
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 30, 2023
We will be blunt. We have not had a chance to read very much of it as we are trying to get the news out to you quickly. We will read the whole thing later and see if there is much to say about it beyond simply "who won?"
But here’s the basic idea. This company wants to go into the business of creating websites for weddings, but its owner believes that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Colorado law purported to force such a company to help create websites celebrating gay marriage. She believed this amounted to compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment. And today the Supreme Court sided with the company and its owner.
For deeper analysis, Mr. Turley kind of front-loaded his analysis before any opinions dropped, writing this about ten minutes before the opinion dropped:
Recommended
Ten minute warning. We are awaiting both the student loan decision and my personal favorite 303 Creative. I have been following 303 Creative since it was before the 10th Circuit as a momentous free speech case in the making. https://t.co/hrWYsijubE
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 30, 2023
From the piece:
‘Eliminating … ideas is CADA’s very purpose.’ Those words from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals about Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act may be some of the most honest but chilling words ever uttered in a federal opinion. The court ruled that a state could not only compel an artist to speak but could prevent that artist from speaking, too.
For some time anti-discrimination law has been allowed to run roughshod over the First Amendment, and we are glad that the Supreme Court has decided not to go any further. However, like we said, we have not read the full opinion and so we are not ready to comment further on the decision.
And we can almost hear detractors saying that ‘sure, its easy for him to say that’ assuming we have never faced prejudice or discrimination. So, for the record, this author is a person who was born with disabilities that has inspired prejudice and discrimination his entire life. And this author is in an interracial marriage who agrees that no one should be forced to make a website celebrating his interracial marriage. These issues are not academic to us, but freedom of expression—which includes the right not to express views one disagrees with—must prevail.
Some reactions:
Justice Sotomayor, dissenting: "By issuing this new license to discriminate in a case brought by a company that seeks to deny same-sex couples the full and equal enjoyment of its services, the immediate, symbolic effect of the decision is to mark gays and lesbians for… https://t.co/4Bx3Nlrywb
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) June 30, 2023
One of the lamest lawyers on the Internet is having a normal one:
On Thursday, GOP Supreme Court said they were ending affirmative action because it was discriminatory. On Friday, same GOP justices ruled to legalize discrimination against LGBTQ community. The Supreme Court is not a court, it's an arm of GOP. We must defeat it! #ExpandSCOTUS
— (((DeanObeidallah))) (@DeanObeidallah) June 30, 2023
DEFUND THE SUPREME COURT!!
— (((DeanObeidallah))) (@DeanObeidallah) June 30, 2023
The Supreme Court just made this legal for "creative professions" to put up on their windows in 303 Creative. pic.twitter.com/Szygf4UcRZ
— Alejandra Caraballo (@Esqueer_) June 30, 2023
Lmfao Justice Gorsuch spent a good portion of the majority opinion in 303 creative taking an absolute nuke to Sotomayor's dissent:
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) June 30, 2023
"It is difficult to read the dissent and conclude we are looking at the same case." pic.twitter.com/ixsj25zhv2
You do not have to bake the cake: In a 6-3 vote, SCOTUS rules in 303 Creative case that government cannot force private businesses or individuals to violate their religious beliefs by providing products services their faiths consider to be sinful. https://t.co/HDbK2NUIYa pic.twitter.com/MCLIrsdWCw
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) June 30, 2023
Justice Sotomayor: “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class.” https://t.co/vqMvt7yT1P
— Demand Justice (@WeDemandJustice) June 30, 2023
If true, that is legal idiocy. There are few ‘protected classes’ in the law and this case isn’t likely to involve one of them.
Let's be clear: nothing happened to the plaintiff in 303 Creative, the whole "case" was a hypothetical exercise, and the GOP Justices used it as a vehicle to undermine every single federal, state, county, and city anti-discrimination law in the country. https://t.co/LTgg9LRBwY
— Max Kennerly (@MaxKennerly) June 30, 2023
This appears to be wrong, too. If you are reasonably afraid to say X, even though X is protected speech, because you are afraid of legal action, that is a violation of freedom of speech known as the chilling effect. The Supreme Court has long said that chilling effects on freedom of expression is its own harm.
There is no limiting principle in 303 Creative. Any service that has a remotely expressive component can result in a denial of service under anti-discrimination laws. Nobody is safe from bigotry in the public square.
— Anthony Michael Kreis (@AnthonyMKreis) June 30, 2023
Notice he talks about bigotry, which is a mindset, rather than discrimination. He is unintentionally proving the Supreme Court’s point.
BREAKING: SCOTUS rules in 303 Creative case that gov’t cannot force private businesses or individuals to violate their religious beliefs.
— David Santa Carla 🦇 (@TheOnlyDSC) June 30, 2023
Pride Month officially BTFO!!! 💀💀💀💀 pic.twitter.com/QlacN00uT2
That is admittedly a funny point. This is how the Supreme Court chose to end Pride Month. We doubt they were doing that deliberately, but it is pretty hilarious.
***
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member