, , ,

Currently pending before the Supreme Court is the issue of whether the government can compel a website designer to create “pure speech” on behalf of those persons who espouse issues on human sexuality which contradict the website designer’s religious beliefs. An essay in City Journal explains the matter:

On February 22, the Supreme Court agreed to hear 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, a case involving a Christian website designer’s refusal, in the face of Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), to create websites that celebrate same-sex weddings. In doing so, the Court has the opportunity to place in proper order two legal guarantees: protection against government-compelled speech and anti-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

In the prior “public accommodations” cases, such as the Masterpiece Cake case, the First Amendment question was whether the creation of a cake or the arrangement of flowers or taking photographs was protected “speech” under the First Amendment (or whether the sale of the cake was “commerce”).

The 303 case presents a different issue. Here the court concluded the creation of a website was “pure speech”. Therefore, the question was whether the government could compel someone to speak (in this case on the issue of a gay marriage).

The issue accepted by the Supreme Court is:

“Whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment.”

You can read the briefs which have been filed in this action, here:

Below, you can read the brief which my office has filed (it has taken much of my time of late).