 He goes, we are obligated to tackle the free speech issue that the case presents. The court, however, shirks that duty and thus permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what people say, hear, and think. And he adds, what the officials did in this case was more subtle than the ham-handed censorship found to be unconstitutional in Volo. And Volo is a great citation for that. He says, but it was no less coercive.