Wall Street Apes
@WallStreetApes
🚨 Colorado Democrats passed and signed into law that businesses are required to use preferred pronouns, if you refuse you can get 4 MONTHS IN JAIL
“If they are interacting with a customer and the customer says, this is my preferred name and these are my preferred pronouns, this is the way I want to be addressed, there is a legal obligation to do that. They’re compelled to use those pronouns and those surnames under Colorado’s law.
That’s compelled speech, and the real kicker is there criminal penalties for it. You can have prison time, jail time for up to 4 months if you don’t abide that.”
- Kristen Waggoner, President, CEO & General Counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom
https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1959622089461407930
Kurt Schemers
@KurtSchemers
⚠️ Colorado Democrats pass UNCONSTITUTIONAL law forcing “Compelled Speech”
The Principle
Under the First Amendment, the government cannot restrict free speech, but also cannot force individuals to say something they don’t believe.
This is what’s known as the ban on compelled speech.
Key Supreme Court Cases
- West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)
Students couldn’t be forced to salute the flag or recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
Justice Jackson wrote: “No official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.”
- Wooley v. Maynard (1977)
A Jehovah’s Witness in New Hampshire objected to the state motto “Live Free or Die” on license plates.
Court ruled the state couldn’t force him to display a message he found objectionable.
- Janus v. AFSCME (2018)
Court ruled public employees could not be forced to pay union fees that supported political speech they disagreed with.
However, there are nuances:
The government can compel factual, non-ideological disclosures in some contexts (e.g., requiring businesses to post health and safety notices, warning labels, or ingredient lists).
But when it crosses into forcing ideological or political speech, it always violates the First Amendment.
9:46 AM · Aug 24, 2025
·
9,364
Views
That’s compelled speech, and the real kicker is there criminal penalties for it. You can have prison time, jail time for up to 4 months if you don’t abide that.”
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
london like lawfare
The is like a freakin’ conservative retirement lottery!
18 U.S.C. § 242 (2023) (Criminal)
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.