State slogan now poses menacing threat to constitutional rights

The Babylon Bee, the popular satire website, recently poked fun at Colorado’s penchant for getting the U.S. Constitution wrong, over and over. And over.

Multiple times the state has wasted taxpayer money – millions of dollars – trying to impose its LGBT religious beliefs and accompanying speech code on a Christian baker, a Christian web designer, and a Christian counselor, among others.

It has lost each time at the Supreme Court in often unanimous rulings.

Which all prompted the Bee to sarcastically explain the Supreme Court “issued an official statement … begging the state of Colorado to please just be normal for once.”

The satire “quoted” Chief Justice John Roberts: “Can you guys just not be weird this one time? You can’t make people bake gay cakes. You can’t make people make gay websites. You can’t make people call a boy a girl. I’m spending ninety percent of my life now telling you guys that you can’t force people to do gay stuff. It’s exhausting. Why can’t you be normal? Chill out, Colorado.”

The “report” then confirmed the court was thinking about “setting up a new court just to overturn whatever Colorado does.”

The humor is there, but the problem is much deeper. In fact, according to constitutional expert Jonathan Turley, whose advice on the Constitution at times has guided the actions of Congress, the state is going down a horrible path.

“Colorado’s tourism slogan, ‘it’s our nature,’ has a menacing meaning for free speech advocates. Colorado is now arguably the most anti-free speech state in the union, pushing an array of measures attacking those with opposing social and political views,” he explained. “The irony is that the state has proved a bonanza for free speech with spectacular legal failures that reaffirmed rather than restricted the First Amendment. Now, the Democratic legislature and governor are back with new unconstitutional measures, including a requirement that lawyers not share information with federal immigration officials as a condition for filing with state courts.”

He noted the Democrats in the state, at the time filling all seats on the state Supreme Court, tried to ban President Trump from the 2024 ballot, only to be slapped hard by the U.S. Supreme Court including every liberal justice.

But he pointed out that in Colorado’s attempt to control its residents’ speech, it actually is giving the free speech movement some huge precedents.

“The state is responsible for the efforts to force business owners to create products celebrating same-sex marriages. That effort led to the Masterpiece Cake Shop case and then the 303 Creative case. Even after losing earlier efforts against Masterpiece Cake Shop owner Jack Phillips, the targeting of its owner continued for years. That litigation proved to be a tremendous victory for free speech,” he explained.

The state’s latest scheme is to plan legislation that would expose counselors engaged in certain speech that doesn’t promote the LGBT ideology to heightened legal liability, including waiving any statute of limitations, he explained, a move likely to produce more court challenges, and more wasted taxpayer money.

The next fight already is in the courts. It’s the state’s demands that people use a person’s “chosen name” and, essentially biologically impossible pronouns.

The case is on behalf of XX-XY Athletics and Born Again Used Books which protested the state’s imposition of its speech code on them.

Further, the state now wants to demand that lawyers certify “under penalty of perjury” that they will not use “personal identifying information” from the state e-filing system to help federal immigration enforcement.

Lawyers already are objecting to that, and it likely will mean more litigation, and more wasted tax money under the administration of homosexual Gov. Jared Polis.

Turley noted in his view the newest scheme is “facially unconstitutional.”

But regardless of court rulings, “Colorado appears hellbent on maintaining its dubious status as the most anti-free speech state in the union. Citizens will continue to subsidize this effort to defend laws compelling or censoring speech,” he warned.