The First Amendment has two sides. Most people know the first one: the government can't silence you. Fewer know the second: it can't make you speak, either. The Supreme Court has been clear on this for decades. It became a lot clearer in June 2023, when the Court handed down 303 Creative v. Elenis and held, 6-3, that compelled speech is unconstitutional regardless of how the government dresses it up.

Lorie Smith designs websites. She's a Christian who declined to create sites for same-sex weddings, and Colorado went after her under its public accommodations law - the same statute that had already produced Masterpiece Cakeshop a few years earlier. The Court didn't rule on Masterpiece's merits; it punted on grounds of agency hostility toward religion. In 303 Creative, there was no way to punt. The question was clean: can the government force an artist to create expressive content that conflicts with her beliefs? Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, said no. The First Amendment protects the right to speak. It equally protects the right not to.

That principle isn't new. Wooley v. Maynard (1977) stopped New Hampshire from forcing citizens to display "Live Free or Die" on their license plates. A Jehovah's Witness couple objected; the Court sided with them. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) went further, striking down mandatory flag salutes in public schools.........

© Townhall