Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron who wrote (486759)	2/22/2022 4:09:47 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 540707

more on the supreme court-- The Supreme Court Just Teed Up a Direct Assault on Civil Rights Law *Opinion* by Mark Joseph Stern - 3h ago The Supreme Court announced on Tuesday that it will decide whether civil rights laws violate the First Amendment when they “compel an artist to speak or stay silent.” By doing so, the court formally commenced its long-delayed project of dismantling non-discrimination laws that protect LGBTQ people. But it is not at all clear that the court will stop at LGBTQ protections. Rather, the justices have indicated that they may take a wrecking ball to the edifice of civil rights law, dismantling the constitutional foundations of non-discrimination in public accommodations. © Provided by SlateJustice Clarence Thomas, intellectual leader of the Supreme Court’s assault on civil rights law. Drew Angerer/Getty Images Tuesday’s grant marks a victory for the conservative campaign to undermine LGBTQ equality by granting businesses a right to discriminate. This campaign nearly succeeded in 2017’s Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which contested Colorado’s ability to penalize a baker who refused to provide wedding cakes to same-sex couples. But in an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Supreme Court did not decide whether this penalty violated the baker’s free speech. Instead, Kennedy punted, holding that the state evinced unconstitutional hostility toward the baker’s religion. continues at The Supreme Court Just Teed Up a Direct Assault on Civil Rights Law (msn.com)