I speak of the 303 Creative case. Allow myself to quote myself from a post I wrote two years ago, “A conservative Court will enshrine the First Amendment as reasoning for open season on discrimination of every kind, especially against the LGBTQ community. I cannot repeat the disaster this will be for America for the next thirty years! Mark my words, morons! People have been asleep at the wheel [emphasis in original].” I titled the post “Catastrophic” two years ago when RBG died for a reason, and it seems — quite predictably — my words are coming to pass.
Let’s cut right to the chase, shall we? Slate explains it well, “And that may be another reason why SCOTUS took up 303 Creative: It provides the opportunity to lay down a seemingly modest legal principle that lower courts can expand to its logical limits and beyond. A decision for Smith will unleash increasingly extreme assaults on civil rights law by Donald Trump’s judges. Trump judges are already champing at the bit to legalize broad swathes of discrimination. 303 Creative may hand them a new weapon against civil rights law, much like SCOTUS’ decision in Bruen let them smash all manner of gun restrictions. It might start with a website designer, but the court’s holding will swiftly spread to bakers, florists, photographers, then venue owners, hotels, caterers, hair stylists, jewelers—any business that can claim its good or services would be used to ‘express’ support for same-sex marriage. This principle might eventually extend to discrimination against all gay people, not just those seeking to get married, under the theory that serving them would require ‘expressing’ support for homosexuality.”
Therein lies the true intentions of SCOTUS: To legalize discrimination against the gays. Full stop! No mincing words! This is the loose thread dangling from your favorite sweater waiting to be pulled or snagged that will tear a hole that cannot be fixed. As I have said so many times, SCOTUS can do whatever they want, and I would not be surprised if they use this case to create a ruling that goes beyond the original question just because they can. Let’s be clear about something: This is a case where no party has been injured. This Lorie Smith cunt was never asked to design a same-sex website. There is no gay couple actually demanding her services. This entire case is theoretical. One may be forgiven for asking how and why this “plaintiff” has standing if she has suffered no harm, but never mind that. SCOTUS wanted this case to be able to legalize discrimination against the gays, so they took it since the fake matter was tailor-made just for this reason. So, forget the oral arguments and all that mumbo-jumbo bullshit. It’s all performative, for their minds have already been decided. Get ready, LGBTQ community! The time approaches! The time to fight back has arrived, and I do not mean that figuratively. Soon enough, you will be denied service at a restaurant because the courts have been given the blueprint to defend people who think serving “the gays” is an infringement of one’s free speech. Outwardly it seems to be an absurd argument, but then again, SCOTUS is about to rule on a case with no injured party; absurdity has long been thrown out the window. Welcome to stupid America!