Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf
Page Number: 60.0

28 

303 CREATIVE LLC v. ELENIS 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

if the company offers its goods or services to the public, it 
remains  free  under  state  law  to  decide  what  messages  to 
include or not to include.  To repeat (because it escapes the
majority):  The  company  can  put  whatever  “harmful”  or 
“low-value” speech it wants on its websites.  It can “tell peo-
ple what they do not want to hear.”  Ante, at 25 (internal 
quotation marks  and  brackets  omitted).    All  the  company
may not do is offer wedding websites to the public yet refuse 
those same websites to gay and lesbian couples.  See Run-
yon, 427 U. S., at 176 (distinguishing between schools’ abil-
ity to express their bigoted view “that racial segregation is
desirable” and the schools’ proscribable “practice of exclud-
ing racial minorities”).

Another  example  might  help  to  illustrate  the  point.    A 
professional  photographer  is  generally  free  to  choose  her 
subjects.  She can make a living taking photos of flowers or 
celebrities.  The State does not regulate that choice.  If the 
photographer opens a portrait photography business to the 
public, however, the business may not deny to any person, 
because  of  race,  sex,  national  origin,  or  other  protected 
characteristic,  the  full  and  equal  enjoyment  of  whatever 
services  the  business  chooses  to  offer.  That  is  so  even 
though  portrait  photography  services  are  customized  and
expressive.  If the business offers school photos, it may not 
deny  those  services  to  multiracial  children  because  the
owner does not want  to create any speech indicating that 
interracial  couples  are  acceptable.    If  the  business  offers 
corporate  headshots,  it  may  not  deny  those  services  to 
women because the owner believes a woman’s place is in the 
home.  And  if  the  business  offers  passport  photos,  it  may 
not deny those services to Mexican Americans because the 
owner opposes immigration from Mexico.

The same is true for sexual-orientation discrimination.  If 
a photographer opens a photo booth outside of city hall and
offers  to  sell  newlywed  photos  captioned  with  the  words 
“Just Married,” she may not refuse to sell that service to a