When Nondiscrimination Laws Get Ridiculous

Ann Arbor, Michigan dodged a federal lawsuit recently by agreeing not to enforce its local nondiscrimination ordinance against a couple of young, conservative entrepreneurs who started a political consulting firm in the city.
The entrepreneurs in question, Grant Strobl and Jacob Chludzinski, founded ThinkRight Strategies, LLC in 2018. They represent, or offer advice to, conservative causes and clients. They do not want to do business with and for liberal causes.
The pair noticed, however, that the mission of their business ran squarely into the prohibitions contained in Ann Arbor’s ordinance, which, among other things, prohibits “public accommodations” (aka businesses) from “discriminating” on the basis of “political beliefs.”
With potential fines of $500 per day facing them, Strobl and Chludzinski consulted attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom, who brought a First Amendment lawsuit on their behalf against the city.
With the latest settlement, Ann Arbor states that ThinkRight Strategies is not a “public accommodation” covered by the ordinance. That’s indeed a creative solution to its legal problem, since the ordinance clearly includes “…business or other facility of any kind, whose goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations are extended, offered, sold or otherwise made available to the public…” ThinkRight Strategies fits that definition as much as any other business in the city.
Sometimes the best way to avoid defeat is to redefine terms. It worked out well in this case, but the overreaching ordinance lives on to trap the next unwary businessperson.
The inspiration for most of today’s state and local nondiscrimination laws is the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, which originally prohibited discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of five characteristics: race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. More than a half-century later, cities like Ann Arbor are up to 23 protected classes, including things like “actual or perceived age,” “arrest record,” “educational association,” “height,” “family responsibilities,” “weight,” and a host of other categories. Such ordinances are merely exercises in “virtue signaling” rather than serious laws designed to remedy serious problems.
The 1964 Act also strictly limited its definition of public accommodations to things like hotels, entertainment venues, modes of public transportation and restaurants where African Americans had traditionally been denied access. Today’s more extreme nondiscrimination laws—of which Ann Arbor’s is the perfect example—define “public accommodations” as any business within the city limits, even those without a brick and mortar presence!
ADF Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs represents ThinkRight Strategies. In a statement posted on ADF’s website, he notes, “The positive outcome here for Grant and Jacob underscores a core American principle: The government can’t force creative professionals to surrender free speech and religious freedoms in order to operate a business.”
Laws that are merely tools to enforce right-thinking about a particular ideology violate the First Amendment’s prohibition of government-compelled speech. Hopefully the lessons Ann Arbor learned in this case will translate into more freedom for its citizens and businesses in the future.
Photo from Alliance Defending Freedom
’Tis the season for holiday reading!
Check out Daily Citizen’s cheery winter reads.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Bruce Hausknecht, J.D., is an attorney who serves as Focus on the Family’s judicial analyst. He is responsible for research and analysis of legal and judicial issues related to Christians and the institution of the family, including First Amendment freedom of religion and free speech issues, judicial activism, marriage, homosexuality and pro-life matters. He also tracks legislation and laws affecting these issues. Prior to joining Focus in 2004, Hausknecht practiced law for 17 years in construction litigation and as an associate general counsel for a large ministry in Virginia. He was also an associate pastor at a church in Colorado Springs for seven years, primarily in worship music ministry. Hausknecht has provided legal analysis and commentary for top media outlets including CNN, ABC News, NBC News, CBS Radio, The New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, The Washington Post, The Washington Times, the Associated Press, the Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, the Boston Globe and BBC radio. He’s also a regular contributor to The Daily Citizen. He earned a bachelor’s degree in history from the University of Illinois and his J.D. from Northwestern University School of Law. Hausknecht has been married since 1981 and has three adult children, as well as three adorable grandkids. In his free time, Hausknecht loves getting creative with his camera and capturing stunning photographs of his adopted state of Colorado.
Related Posts

Corey DeAngelis Sues School Board for Violating His Free Speech
January 17, 2025

Colorado Officials Pay $1.5 Million for Violating the Constitution
November 22, 2024

‘Pride’ and Black Lives Matter Flags to Become School Symbols
November 19, 2024

Help The Campaign to Save Christmas From Woke Censorship
November 15, 2024