Page:303 Creative LLC v. Elenis.pdf/19

Rh, 390 U. S. 400 (1968) (per curiam).

Over time, governments in this country have expanded public accommodations laws in notable ways too. Statutes like Colorado’s grow from nondiscrimination rules the common law sometimes imposed on common carriers and places of traditional public accommodation like hotels and restaurants. Dale, 530 U. S., at 656–657. Often, these enterprises exercised something like monopoly power or hosted or transported others or their belongings much like bailees. See, e.g., Liverpool & Great Western Steam Co. v. Phenix Ins. Co., 129 U. S. 397, 437 (1889); Primrose v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 154 U. S. 1, 14 (1894). Over time, some States, Colorado included, have expanded the reach of these nondiscrimination rules to cover virtually every place of business engaged in any sales to the public. Compare 1885 Colo. Sess. Laws pp. 132–133 (a short list of entities originally bound by the State’s public accommodations law) with Colo. Rev. Stat. §24–34–601(1) (currently defining a public accommodation to include “any place of business engaged in any sales to the public”).

Importantly, States have also expanded their laws to prohibit more forms of discrimination. Today, for example, approximately half the States have laws like Colorado’s that expressly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. And, as we have recognized, this is entirely “unexceptional.” Masterpiece Cakeshop, 584 U. S., at ___ (slip