[programmerpass]

There should be a law in place whereby if you a prove a company was engaged in profitable advertising or activities and stopped doing those activities in response to political stances the company can be prosecuted.

Not sure where this would fit into the law though something like this would certainly curtail cancel culture like activity.

[felixgallo]

https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/compelled-speech/

[darth_avocado]

Companies also have first amendment rights.

[etchalon]

It'd also be blatantly unconstitutional.

[scarface_74]

You’re going to make a company work with another company?

[programmerpass]

The inverse: ensure companies that are already working with companies are not leaving them for illegitimate reasons.

[fredophile]

Who decides what reasons are legitimate?

[programmerpass]

Great question. I don’t have a good answer.

Could a be a “facts and circumstances” type of legislation similar to the IRS. Many IRS rules go back to the “facts and circumstances” of a particular case to evaluate all the nuances relating to it.

[fredophile]

I'm still not clear why you think this would be a good idea. Obviously you have opinions on what is "legitimate" in these situations. Can you explain more about this and how it wouldn't be a first ammendment violation to create such a law?

What "facts and circumstances" are we interested in? Your original post mentioned ending business relationships due to political stances. Did you mean the political stance of the advertisers, the platform hosting ads, some third party or parties, a combination of the above, or something I've missed?

[scarface_74]

Unless they are refusing to cook a cake for a gay couple…

Look up “no duty to deal”.