So there's an aspect of this Supreme Court case on "refusing service on first amendment grounds" that seems particularly complicated. I think it's worthwhile to choose a different example that would perhaps fall into the same kind of situation for analysis. This leaves aside the questions about standing and such that have been raised in the existing case.
Let's say you have a Muslim voice over artist who promotes their services. A member of a protected class comes to them and wants them to produce a series of anti-Muslim ad spots, which would require the voice over artist to use their own voice to promote those messages.
Would it be reasonable for that voice over artist to refuse that work? How is this different or not different from the Supreme Court case at issue?
