Hey, Denver city councilors: nixing an airport concession to punish Chick-fil-A for its politics is a blatant First Amendment violation [Jonathan Adler, Denver Post; earlier on mayors-vs.-Chick-fil-A here, here (diversity of views within ACLU), here, etc., and my writing elsewhere] In Board of Commissioners, Wabaunsee County v. Umbehr (1996), the Supreme Court found that under the First Amendment, while some balancing tests and exceptions are applicable, the government is not broadly free to withhold business from independent contractors based on disapproval of those contractors’ speech on issues of public concern. Note also the more recent round in which Boston and New York City officials vowed retaliation against Donald Trump after controversial remarks.
6 Comments
Seems like a civil rights violation—people making these decisions need to go to prison.
“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” only if you say the approved things.
If Chick-fil-A wins, here comes the “Satanist” bookstore at the airport. That’s how they play it these days.
So if Chick fil-a refuses to cater a same sex marriage, then what says you?
They should have the right to refuse their labor from anyone they want to. If enough people hear about it and don’t want to buy their food they go out of business. If enough people don’t care they stay in business and the party gets catered by someone else. Free Market Rules
I don’t even think the people yelling to ban “Chick-Fil-A” are even gay! I think they’re just lefty Social Justice Warriors who are against “fast food” and they see this as a foot in the door.
For the record, I’m gay, in a same-sex marriage, and we eat at Chick-Fil-A. I can’t make my purchasing decisions based on personal opinions of corporate CEOs.