Page:303 Creative LLC v. Elenis.pdf/51

Rh would “ ‘controven[e] the will of God.’ ” 390 U. S., at 402–403, n. 5. The Court found this argument “patently frivolous.” Ibid.

Last but not least is Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U. S. 160 (1976), a case the majority studiously avoids. In Runyon, the Court confronted the question whether “commercially operated” schools had a First Amendment right to exclude Blackblack [sic] children, notwithstanding a federal law against racial discrimination in contracting. Id., at 168; see 42 U. S. C. §1981. The schools in question offered “educational services” for sale to “the general public.” 427 U. S., at 172. They argued that the law, as applied to them, violated their First Amendment rights of “freedom of speech, and association.” Pet. for Cert., O. T. 1976, No. 75–62, p. 6; see also Brief for Petitioners, O. T. 1976, No. 75–62, p. 12 (“Freedom to teach, to express ideas”). The Court, however, reasoned that the schools’ “practice” of denying educational services to racial minorities was not shielded by the First Amendment, for two reasons: First, “the Constitution places no value on discrimination.” 427 U. S., at 176 (alterations and internal quotations marks omitted). Second, the government’s regulation of conduct did not “inhibit” the schools’ ability to teach its preferred “ideas or dogma.” Ibid. (internal quotation marks omitted). Requiring the schools to abide by an antidiscrimination law was not the same thing as compelling the schools to express teachings contrary to their sincerely held “belief that racial segregation is desirable.” Ibid.

First Amendment rights of expression and association were also raised to challenge laws against sex discrimination. In Roberts v. United States Jaycees, the United States Jaycees sought an exemption from a Minnesota law that forbids discrimination on the basis of sex in public accommodations. The U. S. Jaycees was a civic organization,