First, we were discussing speech not some limited subcategory speech.
Second, threats of unlawful violence are not free speech. Threats not to engage in economic transactions that one is under no obligation to engage in in the first place absolutely are free speech.
This is not “speech”, this is harassment and coercion.
> Second, threats of unlawful violence are not free speech. Threats not to engage in economic transactions that one is under no obligation to engage in in the first place absolutely are free speech.
Threats are never free speech. The law might not prohibit it or it might simply not prosecute it, but it’s never free speech. It’s the same thing as telling someone she must sleep with you if you are to do business with her—it’s quid pro quo harassment, it’s morally repugnant, and it’s most definitely not free speech.