Posted on 06/30/2023 8:17:25 AM PDT by Navy Patriot
The Supreme Court released a ruling on Friday in favor of the Colorado evangelical Christian web designer who had not wanted to be forced by the state to design websites for same-sex marriages.
YES! Huge victory for free speech as Lorie Smith the web designer who did not want to be compelled by CO law to make a same-sex m. website (tho she serviced the lgbt community in general) WINS HER CASE! This is a BIG WIN FOR FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA — Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) June 30, 2023
The justices, 6-3, held that the First Amendment prevents the state from forcing Lorie Smith from designing a website that has a message she disagrees with. As a result of the ruling, Colorado cannot punish Smith under the state’s antidiscrimination law for refusing to work on the website.
(Excerpt) Read more at oann.com ...
Did Justice Jackson know what the word ‘sex’ in same-sex marriage means?
Riddle me this, Chief Roberts:
What’s the difference between forced speech on a website and forced speech on a wedding cake?
Bravo!
faggotry is a protected class now?
I thought they were just like everybody else!!!
May they lose even more!
This will end up being the most significant ruling of the term.
I just wish the court would ground the decision on the free exercise as well as the free speech clause. But they aren’t willing to go that far. Yet.
I am no great fan of Roberts past decisions, but wasnt the cake case sent back down to be reviewed by the lower court? I dont recall where that case is today, but I seem to recall at the time in heated discussion here about that decision, that the USSC was looking for a stronger case to take on. This one would seem to have lasting impact and may supersede the cake case. But I aint a lawyer, so I defer to someone who knows this better.
While i am overjoyed by the ruling i think we have to be careful. You know they will try and use this against us. Can banks now stop doing business with gun or ammo companies? That’s exactly what they want to do
From what I remember, it was remanded back to the state human rights commission that originally decided it, but they weren’t instructed to reverse the decision, and they ended up only reducing the punitive damages, so the decision stands.
Roberts doesn’t normally like bypassing the normal appellate process.
So does this case have an impact on the cake case? Seems like it would.
Praise God, from whom all blessings flow.
We have homosexual owned and themed bakeries here in San Francisco. I’d not ask them to decorate a cake with scripture verses declaring judgements on non hetero married people, either. I respect their right to abstain from selling what they find offensive, even though I disagree with them. I’d never ask.
The Roberts court ruled in favor of Jack Phillips and the pretended need for a wedding cake, didn’t they?
But now Jack is re-persecuted for not baking a trans cake. Hopefully he will prevail again. May God bless this man.
You can be damn near certain that the Sodomite-Lebso lobby targeted this web designer because of her Christian beliefs, bypassing many others who would’ve done it because they wanted to impose their will and trample upon the designer’s first amendment rights.
The difference is that you do not wish to harm them, however they wish to kill you and your family.
Fully Agree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
