SCOTUS and the Ghosts

 

The Colorado web designer who wanted to refuse LGBTQ customers and just won her case at the Supreme Court had claimed in court filings that a man inquired about her services for his same-sex wedding. But the man says he didn’t – and he’s straight. https://t.co/idy1Jy1VI7

— CNN (@CNN) July 1, 2023

I wonder about SCOTUS mostly because I'm a non-lawyer, but I do watch the odd law-related television and follow a bunch of lawyers on Twitter, and it really feels to me like one doesn't have standing over imaginary shit?  Like, it's bad enough that student loan forgiveness seems to have been struck down because of political beef because not even the banks were mad about it, and I'm still not sure who affirmative action hurts. (Because AA only gets someone in the door, but they have to do the coursework. Save your money. Do excellent at your B or C school and transfer in if the big ol' name brand of the school means that much to you. Or whatever. I went to the school that was only one bus route away, myself. And I am definitely a white privilege kid. I'm an English major. I lack vision and purpose. Or so I've been told.)

Anyway--this woman's case was picked up by the ADF--that is, the Alliance Defending Freedom, because of course it was. I don't know whose freedom the Alliance is about--it just looks like Christian supremacy to me.  (And homophobia, transphobia, and the denial of reproductive health freedom. They descend from Dobson and Wildmon--that's all I need to know, fam.) Deep down, I don't love the idea of people discriminating against real people because of what they want to believe their imaginary friends have to say. (I have seen gay folks. I have never seen your god. Sorry if this offends.)

But anyway, this woman was just thinking about going into web design when the horrible thought hit her--what if she was FORCED to support a gay wedding? By making a website about a "happy" same sex couple! The idea! The scary idea! Of having compelled speech in her mouth! 

I know right? Like atheist kids having to pray in school, or pledge allegiance to the flag when that feels very much like some kind of idolatry of the state. I hate when that happens--or when grandstanding religionists make it incidentally happen. 

But do PR people or advertising companies deeply hold what they are commissioned to create? Can I separate Michelangelo from his papal commissions? See, I say things on my job, and refrain from saying other things on my job, because I understand my job. I do not confuse my job with individual freedom of speech. I understand getting a paycheck. (I say my real stuff here.) And I wonder if giving a business owner her space to be a bigot professionally doesn't lend itself to less obvious first amendment claims--I consider the religious freedom bill in Indiana circa 2015.  Denying a marriage website isn't fatal. Denying health care could be. (I think about how health care has been denied to AIDS patients all the time because of bigotry and stigma, and how unnecessary and unfair. And how in the time of segregation, health care was declined for black patients, causing delays that resulted in deaths. And how religious hospitals can deny reproductive health care that saves lives because they don't want to "kill" the wee fetuspeoples their religion demands they save ahead of the whole live humans in front of them.) 

I consider denying a human water or a gas fill up because of who they seem to be. Denying food because of bigotry.  Making people go miles out of their way for services it would be no skin off of one's nose to accept payment for, but one denied because of being petty and mean. Things that deny a person's humanity and basic needs. Things that go right to the heart of accepting them as people. Of accepting their rights.

I just think of county clerks now being sanctioned to deny marriage licenses to same sex couples--why not? And why not deny service in your business to obvious Catholics--servants of the Whore of Babylon? Obvious Jews? People of color? 

SCOTUS opened the door to a parade of miserable outcomes. The ghosts of our terrible past. And they could have just denied standing because the whole deal was made-up--it got selected to be decided because the conservative justices wanted this one, for whatever reason. For this Babel-like confusion--damn them. For this misguided failure to see all humans as equal under the law. 

So for this session, let me offer a toast, and to Chief Justice Roberts, this roast:

They gave their opinions unto the masses,

lifting up their robes, and showing their asses, 

enshrining the hierarchy of the social classes

not with examples, but only off-gasses.

And as for his claim that the criticism his court faces, even from within, weakens, it, I can only suggest that if he can't bear the roasting, he can back away from the stove. And if he were to resign in protest, I could suggest he take Alito and Thomas with him. 

POSTSCRIPT: So mad I could not link to 303 Creative website to be petty because it was serving "Graphic design is my passion" for real. So I am guessing many felt the same way I did about that.