It still feels unnerving to some, even those caught in the crossfire, to see injuries invented wholesale and lies accepted by the highest court in the land.
It still feels unnerving to some, even those caught in the crossfire, to see injuries invented wholesale and lies accepted by the highest court in the land.
This is a really weird narrative some people are trying to push.
The conflict was between Smith and the government, so she sued the government. It could be that her explanation of the motivation is made up, but that’s fairly irrelevant. The question was does she have a right to advertise something on her website about her business.
I also feel like the panic over this is a bit strange. I think a gay web designer, for example, should have every right to say “I won’t make websites for Bible camps that support conversation therapy”, and advertise that on their own website, despite the fact that religion is a protected class.
This ruling, as far as I can tell, secures that right.