Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-07-04 08:44:50 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: E885231222A8461BF54B522BCBC64818C83B0A29C3301BC9F31ABEEDCE2BE445
Participant Details
Original Note:
Tweet expresses an opinion on factually correct claims. The case was based on whether or not a business owner, based on her personal beliefs, could refuse to provide services “celebrating marriages she does not endorse.” SCOTUS ruled she could. Note not needed. https://www.cpr.org/2023/06/30/supreme-court-303-creative-case-lgbtq/ https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf
All Note Details