Scott Lemieux explains why a Chicago alderman went too far when he threatened to deny Chick-Fil-A a license to operate in his ward after the chicken chain’s CEO made bigoted comments against gay marriage:
To understand why Moreno’s actions go too far, it is critical to make some crucial distinctions. The city of Chicago can — and should — protect LGBT people from discrimination by businesses. Compliance with civil-rights law is a legitimate factor to consider in determining whether permits should be granted. If Chick-fil-A had a history of denying service to people based on their sexual orientation, or discriminating against LGBT employees or job applicants, Moreno’s actions would be entirely justified. But Moreno is not alleging that the company has a history of noncompliance with civil-rights codes. Instead, Moreno’s basis for denying the permit are the comments recently made by Cathy defending his opposition to same-sex marriage. Unlike a pattern of discrimination, however, Cathy’s comments are not a legitimate reason to deny Chick-fil-A a permit. It crosses the line into the kind of viewpoint discrimination forbidden by the First Amendment, which Moreno, in this case acting as a state actor, is failing to comply with.
Read the whole thing. It’s an excellent primer on the scope and limits of the First Amendment as it applies to public officials punishing speech they deem to be harmful.
SPECIAL DEAL: Subscribe to our award-winning print magazine, a publication Bernie Sanders calls "unapologetically on the side of social and economic justice," for just $1 an issue! That means you'll get 10 issues a year for $9.95.
