When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the First Amendment right to free speech and artistic expression last month, the Colorado Republican Party rejoiced.

“Something to actually be proud of on the last day of June!” the party’s official Twitter (now “X”) account tweeted, celebrating the Court’s decision in 303 Creative v. Elenis.

“Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance,” Colorado’s own SCOTUS Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the 6-3 majority. “As this Court has long held, the opportunity to think for ourselves and to express those thoughts freely is among our most cherished liberties and part of what keeps our Republic strong.”

George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin summed it up well: “I think there’s a long history of Supreme Court precedent which shows that you cannot compel people to speak messages that they object to,” he told me on 710KNUS radio.

As I pointed out following the ruling, compelled speech is not free speech. The case was an unequivocal win for liberty.

Stay up to speed: Sign-up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

So, why is the Colorado GOP reportedly going to ask its central committee members to consider an amendment to the party’s bylaws that enshrines a principle totally anathema to the one Justice Gorsuch affirmed – and the Colorado Republican Party previously praised?

The proposed amendment states: “Where a state statute requires an approval of at least 70% or more of the total membership of the party’s state central committee to approve an action, the failure to submit a ballot by a CRC voting member shall be deemed, for all purposes, to be a vote in the affirmative on the proposed action.”

This party rules change would bind members who do NOT vote on something – whether because they either cannot attend or refuse to participate in protest. In other words, the GOP is ready to compel speech – to force Republicans to take a stand they may not agree with.

Come again?

In less than a month, some in the Colorado GOP’s leadership seem to have forgotten – or abandoned – Justice Gorsuch’s tenet that compelled speech is not free speech. This proposal is flatly against the First Amendment. It is anti-free speech. And it is an affront to the U.S. Constitution.

It’s also a strange position for a party led by individuals who have spent so much time talking about “rigged elections” and “stolen votes.” Not only would this change to party bylaws compel speech – it would literally steal members’ votes by deciding for them.

The Weld County Republican Party has strongly rebuked the compelled vote effort, urging “a no vote from voting members at the (state central committee) meeting on August 5th.” The county party passed a resolution affirming the commonsense belief that “any proposal to create a governance where an absent vote by default becomes an automatic ‘yes’ vote is not only morally and ethically wrong, but it may also be a violation of both state and federal constitutions as well as Colorado state statutes.” Spot-on.

I’m old enough to remember when the Republican Party at least tried to stand for the Constitution. Has that goal been forsaken in Colorado?

Opponents to the bylaws amendment have compared it to a possible vote on repealing the invaluable Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. Imagine if a voter declined or failed to turn in their ballot, which included a repeal of TABOR, and the Democrat-controlled Legislature decreed each nonvote was counted as a “yes.” Republicans would appropriately lose their minds – and a key check on government power.

Let’s be real: Only an actual RINO (Republican In Name Only) would rebuke everything the party stands for and endorse such a brazen power-grab – in the official Republican Party bylaws.

But there’s something even more concerning at play. Under state law, there’s only one instance where a 70% vote of a political party’s central committee is required. That’s to “opt out” of the state’s open-primary system, which mandates unaffiliated voters get to participate in political party primaries.

The Colorado Republican Central Committee will vote in September on whether to end Republicans’ participation in open primaries. This bylaws change is the set-up for that vote.

Here’s the thing: The opt-out won’t just end the “open” part of primaries, where unaffiliateds get to vote. It would terminate Republican primaries altogether. As I argued the last time the party considered this (in 2021), doing so would disenfranchise everyday Republicans and hand Democrats even greater advantages by diminishing the GOP’s chances of engaging more voters.

But since some supporters apparently want to disenfranchise Republican central committee members by stealing their votes, I guess that makes sense.

I agree the open primary is unconstitutional. Yet leaving the primary altogether like this empowers entrenched party activists and bosses – those who best understand the convoluted caucus-assembly process – to the exclusion of everyday Republicans.

Some opponents have argued the primary opt-in is merely a power-grab for elite Republicans. Well, if opt-out advocates use this tactic to force the change – they’ll prove those opponents right.

Absence does not equal consent. If Colorado Republican leaders approve this amendment, it will signal party leaders reject the Supreme Court’s decision in 303 Creative – and forgo all credibility in challenging liberal policies that attempt to compel speech of any kind. Let’s hope the party faithful vote it down.

Jimmy Sengenberger is an investigative journalist, public speaker, and host of “The Jimmy Sengenberger Show” Saturdays from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. on News/Talk 710 KNUS. Reach Jimmy online at JimmySengenberger.com or on Twitter @SengCenter.