A report that reviewed the policies of 75 major American corporations found rampant disregard for religious freedom and free speech in virtually every company and only saw eight businesses improve from last year.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District that a school district violated the Free Exercise and Free Speech rights of a high-school football coach when it disciplined him for praying quietly after three games. Ever since the Court’s ruling, the Twitter-verse has been rife with ill-founded claims that Justice Gorsuch’s majority opinion rewrote the actual facts of the case. Folks making this claim have routinely cited the photographs that Justice Sotomayor included in her dissent.

Before President Joe Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act, the White House played footage of the Meet the Press interview in which he first came out in favor of same-sex marriage.

Biden referenced the television appearance in his own remarks at the signing ceremony. “Ten years ago, I got into trouble,” he said. He was vice president at the time, and he had endorsed gay marriage before then-President Barack Obama.

The State Department has now designated 12 “Countries of Particular Concern” and placed four more on a “Special Watch List” under the International Religious Freedom Act “for having engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom.”

Yet here at home, the federal government is seeking to compel people to betray their religious beliefs. While such violations of religious freedom pale in comparison to those that China and Iran perpetrate, they are attacks on conscience nonetheless. And the hypocrisy is inescapable.

The Supreme Court heard arguments today in a case that could curtail states that seek to ban anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination, 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis.

Lorie Smith of Denver, Colorado owns 303 Creative, a web design business, and she sued the state preemptively to get a religious exemption to the state’s anti-discrimination law because she doesn’t want to make websites for same-sex couples’ weddings.

The US Supreme Court has heard arguments in the case of a graphic designer who refused to create wedding websites for same-sex couples.

It is the latest case to reach the top court that pits free speech rights against anti-discrimination laws.

Lorie Smith, from Colorado, argues she cannot offer her services to same-sex couples because of her Christian faith.

But this may violate a state law prohibiting businesses from refusing service due to sexual orientation.

Most US states have similar anti-discrimination laws in place.

The Supreme Court grappled Monday with balancing free speech against gay rights, hearing a case involving a Colorado website designer who says she shouldn’t be compelled to violate the tenets of her faith by creating products for same-sex marriages.

Web designer Lorie Smith in her challenge of Colorado’s pro-LGBTQ law is asking the Supreme Court to protect her First Amendment right not to be forced to work on something she opposes.

Let’s start with the positive: Republicans and Democrats are coming together to protect same-sex marriage from the Supreme Court.

The Respect for Marriage Act codifies marriages and came about amid worries among Democrats that the same conservative majority on the Supreme Court that took away the right to abortion will target same-sex marriage in the future.

The version that overcame a filibuster in the Senate passed the Senate Tuesday. A dozen Republican senators from across the country voted with Democrats before Thanksgiving to limit debate and move toward a final vote.

The Respect for Marriage Act, a historic bill to codify the right to same-sex and interracial marriages, cleared its main obstacle on Tuesday after it passed the Senate — but the measure's provisions don't go as far as many had hoped they would.