Lmst

On January 30, the Oregon Court of Appeals heard oral argument in Klein v. Oregon BOLI ("Sweetcakes by Melissa" case), which was remanded by the US SCt for reconsideration in light of 303 (this previously happened after Masterpiece Cakeshop).

Note BOLI's focus in second half of its argument on stipulation in 303, not present in Klein, that owner "vetted" customers. If BOLI wins, that is likely to be key.

Video of argument available here:
https://oregoncourts.mediasite.com/mediasite/Channel/default/watch/00684de41396421ab764e1a20c96a4591d

#Law #LawFedi #303Creative

Joshua Douglas, law professor at University of Kentucky and author of the forthcoming "The Voters v. The Court," joins the podcast to shed light on the significant developments and controversies surrounding the Supreme Court's 2023 term, touching on key decisions related to affirmative action, private business discrimination, and democracy.

#supremecourt #scotus #studentsforfairadmissions #303creative #democracy #democracynerd

https://democracynerd.us/episode/reviewing-the-supreme-courts-2023-term-w-joshua-douglas

The New Jersey Division of Civil Rights has issued guidance on the impact of the Supreme Court's decision in 303 Creative: https://nj.gov/oag/dcj/agguide/pdfs/2023-0726-Guidance-on-the-New-Jersey-Law-Against-Discrimination-OAG-DCR.pdf

Two notes about the excerpt below from that guidance:

1. The 303 majority didn't provide test for determining when vendor speech expresses vendor's "own" message in contested cases, instead relying on stipulations.

2. Maj. also relied on stipulation that 303 would "vet" all customers.

#LawFedi #Law #SCOTUS #303Creative #CivilRights #FreeSpeech

The Supreme Court’s ruling exempts from anti-discrimination laws like the LAD only a narrow set of services offered by some places of public accommodation. In order to assert an exemption, at a minimum, a public accommodation must establish that (1) its creative services are “original” and “customized and tailored” for each customer; (2) the creation is “expressive” and expresses the creator’s own First Amendment protected speech; and (3) the public accommodation’s refusal to provide the creative service to a customer is based on the message it conveys, not the customer’s identity or protected characteristic standing alone. As a practical matter, many of the products or services that meet that narrow definition—for example, a documentary film created by a movie director—are created by artists or businesses that fall outside the LAD’s definition of a public accommodation already. Moreover, because the overwhelming majority of places of public accommodation do not provide “customized,” “original,” and “expressive” products or services to the public that express the creator’s own speech, the Court’s decision does not exempt most places of public accommodation—or most goods and services—from the LAD. That is why, as the Court itself acknowledged, state civil rights law still applies to “a vast array of businesses” selling “innumerable goods and services.”

The #SupremeCourt’s public standing has been eroded by extreme decisions like that of #DobbsvJackson #Women’s #Health Organization. The court’s decision in #303Creative LLC v. Elenis, along with the manufactured controversy that inspired the case, does the court no favors.
https://www.au.org/the-latest/articles/supreme-court-303-creative-public-trust

Yet #Another #fact in the #antiLGBTQ #SupremeCourt #wedding #website #case was a lie.

The #website #designer in the #303Creative, had created a #wedding #website, before filing her #legal #challenge despite claiming that a "fear" of #prosecution had kept her from doing so.”

#Women #Transgender #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA #Conservatives #Extremism #Hategroups #RepublicanParty #Hate #Bigotry #Violence #Genocide #Discrimination #Homophobia #ThePartyOfHate

https://www.alternet.org/another-important-fact-a-lie/

Prof. Anthony Infanti (Pitt Law) expresses skepticism that narrow interpretations of 303 Creative will prevail, arguing that "the expression of personal beliefs is in no way confined to providing customized services," and warning of implications in other areas of nondiscrimination law.

#Law #LawFedi #SCOTUS #303Creative https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/4118258-the-supreme-court-codified-discrimination-against-me-and-possibly-you/

The Supreme Court codified discrimination against me, and possibly you

Following 303 Creative, it will take little time before landlords claim the right to discriminate against same-sex couples and their families on the ground that providing them shelter would require the landlord to condone same-sex relationships and facilitate same-sex sexual behavior in violation of their beliefs.

https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/4118258-the-supreme-court-codified-discrimination-against-me-and-possibly-you/

#lgbtq #civilrights #discrimination #aclu #glad #scotus #303creative

Related to today's report that 303 Creative included a wedding website in past public portfolio advertising its services, despite telling courts that it did "not yet offer wedding-related services":

In our amicus brief, we noted that the public record of how 303 operated its broader website business was in tension with its portrayal in court.

#SCOTUS #LawFedi #Law #303Creative

Text from Brief Excerpt (part 1 of 3):

Here, Petitioners do not satisfy any of the three factors identified by this Court for assessing whether providing service under the Act would be
perceived as sending the Petitioners’ own message. For starters, Petitioners are not selective. This is apparent from the public record, which makes clear that Petitioners’ provision of website services would hardly be perceived as a “coherent speech product” indicating their own views of “what merits celebration.” Eugene Volokh, Treating Social Media Platforms Like Common Carriers?, 1 J. Free Speech L. 377, 423 25 (2021).

One of the websites in Petitioners’ portfolio—on which the much-touted “Designed by 303creative.com” notice appears—is a website for a blues band promoting a song list featuring “Shake Your Money Maker.” Another—which also bore a “Designed By 303Creative LLC” notice—was for a law firm prominently listing divorce and marijuana law services. Other 303 Creative projects include website design for real estate and mortgage companies, a roofing company, a sports apparel company, a jeweler, a DJ service, and a breeder of French bulldogs with puppies to spare.

Petitioners claim that Lorie Smith intends her “custom websites” to be “her message” and “her speech,” Pet’rs Br. 12 13, 29, but no reasonable observer familiar with Petitioners’ work and web design would draw that conclusion. The range and breadth of clients, causes, and messages represented here makes clear that Petitioners are exceptionally nonselective. Nobody would review Petitioners’ work and infer that they approved, endorsed, or otherwise sent

a message of their own concerning divorce, marijuana use, breeding French bulldogs, hiring a DJ from DanceTraxProductions, or shaking your money maker.

At bottom, Petitioners’ commercial provision of website design services involves them in nothing more than a collection of “individual, unrelated segments” of third-party messages. See Hurley, 515 U.S. at 576. Petitioners’ choice to serve a client does not send any objective message, even if they use a stamp on every site and insist in a legal brief that Ms. Smith promotes “causes closer to her heart.” Pet’rs Br. 2. Because Petitioners are not selective, being required to serve more clients does not burden a message of their own apparent to any third-party observer.

This conclusion is confirmed by the commercial nature of Petitioners’ work. They are not throwing a parade. See Hurley, 515 U.S. at 574. They are not running a civic membership organization. See Dale, 530 U.S. at 657. They do not enter into an expressive association with every prospective customer, and they do not impliedly adopt every customer’s message as their own. See, e.g., FAIR, 547 U.S. at 65 (“Nothing about recruiting suggests that law schools agree with any speech by recruiters.”). Instead, Petitioners
exchange website design services for money, a practice that further undermines any perception that they are engaged in a fundamentally and inherently expressive endeavor.

#SCOTUS #303Creative
"A Colorado woman who claimed her state’s support for same-sex marriage barred her from designing wedding websites ... appears to have designed at least one wedding website before it was scrubbed from her archive."

The Guardian:
Woman in anti-LGBTQ+ supreme court case did make wedding site after all, report says

"Lorie Smith had argued her right to free speech regarding her opposition to same-sex marriage was ‘chilled’ by Colorado’s law."
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2023/jul/25/lgbtq-rights-supreme-court-case-wedding-site

The #Implications of #SupremeCourt's #303Creative #Decision Are Already Being #Felt

#Women #Transgender #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA #Conservatives #Extremism #Corruption #RepublicanParty #Religion #Hate #Bigotry #Violence #Genocide #Discrimination #Racism #Homophobia #Transphobia #EmptyThePews #ThePartyOfHate

https://time.com/6295024/303-creative-supreme-court-future-implications/

"We'll be watching your hiring practices..." Nothing to see here, just new shots over the bow - remember in #303Creative, no one asked her to make a website against her bigoted beliefs - it's trickle-down from #US Supreme Court cherry-picking hallucinated cases, to legislate from the bar. But #GQP #GOP's cool.
#affirmative #action #SCOTUS #ExpandTheCourt #LGBTQ #rights #ethics #Thomas #Alito #Gorsuch #Ginny too #bought #judges | #tacos #more #supreme #than #this #court https://news.yahoo.com/gop-attorneys-general-cite-affirmative-203208796.html

My recent blogpost on yet another danger of Gorsuch J’s opinion in #303Creative

Of Stalking Horses And Dogs That Did Not Bark: 303 Creative LLC V Elenis, Standards Of Review, Commercial Speech, And The End Of The Beginning Of The Modern First Amendment http://cearta.ie/2023/07/of-stalking-horses-and-dogs-that-did-not-bark-303-creative-llc-v-elenis-standards-of-review-commercial-speech-and-the-end-of-the-beginning-of-the-modern-first-amendment/

After SupremeCourt's #303Creative ruling: #Inequality and #Stigma inflicts #harm on #children.

#Parents’ #rights” should never come at the #cost of #harm to #children. #AntiLGBTQ+ #discrimination #harms #children. #Passiton.

#Women #Transgender #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA #Conservatives #Extremism #RepublicanParty #Religion #Hate #Bigotry #Violence #Genocide #Discrimination #Homophobia #Transphobia #EmptyThePews #ThePartyOfHate

'In this case, all we heard about was poor Lorie Smith and how she was “worried” about creating same-sex websites. There was no real same-sex couple on the other side of this story, explaining how being turned down because of who they are and whom they love is devastating, stigmatizing and illegal. The requirement that there be a real case and real injury ensures that we don’t get these kinds of one-sided stories.’

#JayKuo #SCOTUS #303Creative #LegalStanding

https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/standing-out-of-nothing

Legitimacy of 'customer' in Supreme Court gay rights case raises ethical and legal flags

The revelation has raised questions about how the case made it to the nation’s highest court with such an apparent misrepresentation

https://sentinelcolorado.com/metro/legitimacy-of-customer-in-supreme-court-gay-rights-case-raises-ethical-and-legal-flags/

#COpolitics #303Creative #SCOTUS

@Litzz11

#303creative tries to piss in your face. Complains you won't open your mouth.

#303Creative is like "404: Not Found." There was no case without lying and making one up. https://coloradonewsline.com/2023/07/03/303-creative-a-fake-case-with-real-consequence/

"Josh Hawley's Wife Faces Calls to Be Sanctioned Over Supreme Court Case"
https://www.newsweek.com/erin-hawley-supreme-court-case-1810419
h/t (b/c credit where due) @downwithtyranny @lisamelton #SCOTUS

Another #303creative inconsistency

On https://303creative.com/websites/ there is a testimonial from 'Christy, Owner – Simplicity Candles'

Now simplicitycandles.com is currently unallocated but there is a simplicitycandles.ca and that is Google's best match

www.simplicitycandles.ca/about shows the owners of the site are Cynthia & Steve. So who's Christy?

Looking at the code for that page it is clearly a SquareSpace page. Squarespace - the DIY website creator that removes the need for a website designer

‘#Elon clowns… his own most committed stans and the media, just making something up… that everyone… [runs] with, like that week when we had to have a very serious debate about the ethics of sharing the location of private jets’

“Assassination coordinates,” “murder attempt,” “funding secured,” “6 months definitely,” etc.

Like T••••, Fox, #SCOTUS in the anti-gay #303Creative case https://twitter.com/tomgara/status/1675850744241455104?s=46

#SCOTUS #303Creative #LGBTQrights #Oregon
"The court Friday ordered review of Melissa Klein v. Oregon Department of Labor in light of the 303 Creative decision ..."

Oregon Antigay Bakers' Case to Be Reviewed in Light of Supreme Court Ruling

"So it begins: The Supreme Court orders a review of the discrimination finding against Aaron and Melissa Klein, who turned away a lesbian couple."
https://www.advocate.com/law/scotus-sweet-cakes-303-creative?share_id=7732660&utm_campaign=RebelMouse&utm_content=The+Advocate&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

#303Creative

Client Info