Minnesota First Amendment Case

August 30, 2019

By John McClaughry

Last week, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals protected a Christian couple from having to choose between their business and their conscience.

The plaintiffs, Carl and Angel Larsen, are videographers who create “commercials, short films, and live-event productions.” While they work with anyone of any race, sex, sexual orientation, or religion, they will not produce videos that advance viewpoints that violate their Christian beliefs. That includes videos that “contradict biblical truth; promote sexual immorality; support the destruction of unborn children; promote racism or racial division; incite violence; degrade women; or promote any conception of marriage other than as a lifelong institution between one man and one woman.”

The Larsens hoped to begin producing wedding videos, but Minnesota interpreted its human-rights act to require them to “produce both opposite-sex- and same-sex-wedding videos, or none at all.” They filed suit, claiming that Minnesota’s rule would compel them to speak in support of messages they oppose. The trial court ruled in favor of the state, but the 8th Circuit reversed.

It held that “The Larsens’ wedding videos are a form of speech that is entitled to First Amendment protection. …Even antidiscrimination laws, as critically important as they are, must yield to the Constitution. And as compelling as the interest in preventing discriminatory conduct may be, speech is treated differently under the First Amendment.”

It’s long overdue for courts to declare that people can’t be forced to take part in speech that they find morally repugnant.

John McClaughry is vice president of the Ethan Allen Institute

{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }

Boganboy September 1, 2019 at 1:57 am

I agree. Those who want services other than the Larsens wish to provide can go elsewhere. That is what a free market is all about; one can take one’s custom elsewhere if the service provider does not provide what you want.

I’d also argue that toleration does not mean that you must conform rigorously to the preferences of others. It simply means that you do your thing, and allow others to do theirs.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

About Us

The Ethan Allen Institute is Vermont’s free-market public policy research and education organization. Founded in 1993, we are one of fifty-plus similar but independent state-level, public policy organizations around the country which exchange ideas and information through the State Policy Network.
Read more...

Latest News

Scott: Make Paid Family Leave Voluntary, Unless Nobody Wants It

November 12, 2019 By Rob Roper For the past year, Governor Scott has been making the good fight on Paid Family Leave in demanding any such plan be...

False Claims of Falsity About Vermont’s Business Climate

November 8, 2019 by Rob Roper In a recent “fact check” piece by Vermont Digger, the online news site nailed Governor Scott’s comment that Energizer Battery’s decision to...

Sen. Warren and Medicare for All

November 7, 2019 by John McClaughry Last week Sen.  Elizabeth Warren released the details of her Medicare-for-All plan. The Wall Street Journal studied her explanation and concluded that ...

VT Education “Reforms” Not Helping Test Scores

November 5, 2019 by Rob Roper The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NEAP), aka the Nation’s Report Card, scores are out, and, sadly, it seems I write this...

Invisible high risk pools

October 25, 2019 by John McClaughry The Trump administration and Congressional Republicans are putting together a replacement bill for Obamacare, if it is struck down in a pending...

Video