The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

#9,557
#9,557
lawgator1 said:
I've not had the privilege of arguing a case there, although i have had several over the years that were submitted (by my side or the other). Came close a few years back in a shooting case. I won't bore you with the details. I have argued numerous times to the US Eleventh Circuit. Still, a case at the Supreme Court is top of the heap.
Click to expand...
there is only one heap you are on top of.
 
#9,560
#9,560
For those that don't like CNN.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ’s conservative majority sounded sympathetic Monday to a Christian graphic artist who objects to designing wedding websites for gay couples, the latest collision of religion and gay rights to land at the high court.

The designer and her supporters say that ruling against her would force artists — from painters and photographers to writers and musicians — to do work that is against their beliefs. Her opponents, meanwhile, say that if she wins, a range of businesses will be able to discriminate, refusing to serve Black, Jewish or Muslim customers, interracial or interfaith couples or immigrants.

Over more than two hours of spirited arguments, the justices repeatedly tested out what ruling for the designer could mean, using detailed and sometimes colorful hypothetical scenarios. Those included a Black Santa asked to take a picture with a child dressed in a Ku Klux Klan outfit, a photographer asked to take pictures for the marital infidelity website Ashley Madison, and an invented food business called “Grandma Helen’s Protestant Provisions.”

Justices spar in latest clash of religion and gay rights
 
#9,562
#9,562
Sorry. You can’t force business owners to violate their religious faith whether you like it or not.
 
#9,564
#9,564
allvol123 said:
If she wins then businesses will be freer? Oh no!
Click to expand...
This is a weird case. She wasn't sued by a gay couple like the cake situation, she doesn't even currently create wedding websites for anyone. This is a preemptive thing from her in response to Colorado law that doesn't allow discrimination when providing a service based on sexual orientation, race, disability, etc.
 
#9,566
#9,566
zeppelin128 said:
Curious how folks would feel about an Islamic business owner refusing to serve a Christian?
Click to expand...

It probably wouldn’t feel great. I sure wouldn’t try to take them to court to make them take my business.

Generally speaking, I prefer not to do business with someone who doesn’t want to do business with me. (Especially if this is a hypothetical restaurant 🤣)
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, Matt2496, Bassmaster_Vol and 5 others
#9,567
#9,567
allvol123 said:
Fine and dandy. It is literally their business.
Click to expand...
Seems like that is how SCOTUS is going to rule, judging from their comments today. What about necessary services like grocery stores, pharmacies, things like that. Is it still okay to deny a group of people from buying food or medicine?
 
#9,568
#9,568
zeppelin128 said:
Seems like that is how SCOTUS is going to rule, judging from their comments today. What about necessary services like grocery stores, pharmacies, things like that. Is it still okay to deny a group of people from buying food or medicine?
Click to expand...

Hope so.

Yes.
 
#9,569
#9,569
DC_Vol said:
It probably wouldn’t feel great. I sure wouldn’t try to take them to court to make them take my business.

Generally speaking, I prefer not to do business with someone who doesn’t want to do business with me. (Especially if this is a hypothetical restaurant 🤣)
Click to expand...
Nobody took her to court. She did this on her own.
 
#9,570
#9,570
zeppelin128 said:
Seems like that is how SCOTUS is going to rule, judging from their comments today. What about necessary services like grocery stores, pharmacies, things like that. Is it still okay to deny a group of people from buying food or medicine?
Click to expand...
Those things aren’t fundamentally the speech of the goods/service provider is the distinction. She’s saying that creating a website is a form of artistic expression covered by 1A, like the cakes.
 
#9,572
#9,572
zeppelin128 said:
You'd be okay with a grocery store putting a sign up that says "no blacks allowed"?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Why should a business be forced to conduct business in a manner that satisfies me or anyone else.

Don’t misconstrue that as me supporting that message. A business owner should have the right to be as stupid as they want.
 
#9,573
#9,573
RockyTop85 said:
Those things aren’t fundamentally the speech of the goods/service provider is the distinction. She’s saying that creating a website is a form of artistic expression covered by 1A, like the cakes.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting distinction they are making IMO. Not one I had previously considered
 
#9,574
#9,574
RockyTop85 said:
Those things aren’t fundamentally the speech of the goods/service provider is the distinction. She’s saying that creating a website is a form of artistic expression covered by 1A, like the cakes.
Click to expand...
She's providing a service to the public though; just because you provide a service to someone doesn't mean you support them. And the colorado.gov is not compelling speech or acceptance. Just equal access for everyone.

I wonder how this case would be viewed if we replace gay marriage with interracial marriage.
 
#9,575
#9,575
allvol123 said:
Absolutely. Why should a business be forced to conduct business in a manner that satisfies me or anyone else.

Don’t misconstrue that as me supporting that message. A business owner should have the right to be as stupid as they want.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying you are supporting that, just making a comparison for arguments sake. I appreciate you being consistent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: allvol123
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top