A question about Chip’s “no solicitude” position to the 
compelled speech claim for Fred the photographer or DJ:  Chip, would you say 
the same as to a singer?  A portrait painter?  A calligrapher?

               Antidiscrimination laws ban religious discrimination as well as 
sexual orientation discrimination.  Say a motivational speaker who generally 
speaks to pretty much any group is asked to speak to a Church of Scientology 
gathering, or a press release writer who is generally open for business is 
asked to write a press release for the Scientologists.  Would he have a 
legitimate claim not to be compelled to speak to such an audience, or to write 
such a press release?

               Such laws in some places also ban discrimination based on 
political affiliation.  (D.C. is one example.)  Say someone doesn’t want to 
write a press release for a candidate who belongs to a party he disapproves of. 
 Would that be enough for a compelled speech claim?  Is the line between 
creators of different kinds of speech (photographs vs. portraits vs. press 
releases vs. speeches)?  Or is it that people who write/speak/etc. for a 
living, and who take various contracts, can’t raise compelled speech objections 
in any contexts?


From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Ira Lupu
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 11:29 AM
To: Mitchell Berman <mitch...@law.upenn.edu>
Cc: David Bernstein <dbern...@gmu.edu>; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics 
<religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>; conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Noteworthy, puzzling scholars' brief in Arlene Flowers

Mitch Berman's good question asks in general terms about how much "solicitude" 
Fred's claim deserves.  But we cannot answer intelligently unless we know the 
forum and the grounds advanced for Fred.  Is he asking the state legislature to 
exempt religious objectors from public accommodations law?  Is he raising a 
compelled speech claim?  A religious freedom claim under a RFRA, or a state 
constitution?  I would give his claim no solicitude in any of these contexts, 
for reasons I have spelled out at length on this listserv and in law reviews.  
But I can imagine that others might well react differently depending on the 
legal context.
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to