Unanimous Court Limits Regulatory Jawboning

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that if a financial regulator threatens banks or insurers to sever ties with a controversial group because of its viewpoint, that violates the First Amendment. The decision vacated a lower court ruling and clarifies that coercive pressure, even without formal orders, can be unconstitutional. It sets a high bar against using regulatory leverage to achieve speech suppression by proxy. — This establishes a cross‑ideological legal backstop against government‑driven deplatforming via regulated intermediaries, shaping future fights over speech and financial access.