The Supreme Court Issues a Superb Free-Speech Decision — Literally

In 303 Creative, the Court upholds the principle, central to our democracy, that the government doesn’t get to decide which ideas people are allowed to express.

Share this story

The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. Inset: Web designer Lorie Smith poses for a portrait at her office in Littleton, Colo., November 28, 2022.

Amy Sparwasser/iStock/Getty Images, Kevin Mohatt/Reuters

Words matter. So does their meaning. Consider the word “literally.” No, literally. Consider it. Sometimes people use it to reference something actual, free of elaboration. Other times they use it figuratively, full of exaggeration. “It was literally out of this world” could describe Neil Armstrong’s trip to the moon (actual) or someone’s experience at a Taylor Swift concert (figurative — most likely). Language enthusiasts debate whether “literally” should have one or both meanings, but ultimately individuals decide how to use the word to best express themselves — literally or figuratively.

But what if the government compelled you to say “literally” using only the government’s preferred meaning? Worse, what if the government punished you if you didn’t comply? Clearly, that would be wrong. Don’t you have the right to your own speech?

BN

About the Author

Bryan Neihart

Bryan Neihart is legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom (@ADFLegal), which represents Lorie Smith and 303 Creative.

Comments

Advertisement

Advertisement