Associated Press
In a defeat for gay rights, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruled that a Christian graphic artist who wants to design wedding websites can refuse to work with same-sex couples. One of the court’s liberal justices wrote in a dissent that the decision’s effect is to “mark gays and lesbians for second-class status” and that it opens the door to other discrimination.
The court ruled 6-3 for designer Lorie Smith despite a Colorado law that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation, race, gender and other characteristics. Smith had argued that the law violates her free speech rights.
Smith’s opponents warned that a win for her would allow a range of businesses to discriminate, refusing to serve Black, Jewish or Muslim customers, interracial or interfaith couples or immigrants. But Smith and her supporters had said that a ruling against her would force artists — from painters and photographers to writers and musicians — to do work that is against their beliefs.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court’s six conservative justices that the First Amendment “envisions the United States as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands.” Gorsuch said that the court has long held that “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.”
In a dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote: “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class.” She was joined by the court’s two other liberals, Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Sotomayor said that the decision’s logic “cannot be limited to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.” A website designer could refuse to create a wedding website for an interracial couple, a stationer could refuse to sell a birth announcement for a disabled couple, and a large retail store could limit its portrait services to “traditional” families, she wrote.
The decision is a win for religious rights and one in a series of cases in recent years in which the justices have sided with religious plaintiffs. Last year, for example, the court ruled along ideological lines for a football coach who prayed on the field at his public high school after games.
The decision is also a retreat on gay rights for the court. For nearly three decades, the court has expanded the rights of LGBTQ people, most notably giving same-sex couples the right to marry in 2015 and announcing five years later in a decision written by Gorsuch that a landmark civil rights law also protects gay, lesbian and transgender people from employment discrimination.
Even as it has expanded gay rights, however, the court has been careful to say those with differing religious views needed to be respected. The belief that marriage can only be between one man and one woman is an idea that “long has been held — and continues to be held — in good faith by reasonable and sincere people here and throughout the world,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the court’s gay marriage decision.
The court returned to that idea five years ago when it was confronted with the case of a Christian baker who objected to designing a cake for a same-sex wedding. The court issued a limited ruling in favor of the baker, Jack Phillips, saying there had been impermissible hostility toward his religious views in the consideration of his case. Phillips’ lawyer, Kristen Waggoner, of the Alliance Defending Freedom, also brought the most recent case to the court. On Friday, she said the Supreme Court was right to reaffirm that the government cannot compel people to say things they do not believe.
“Disagreement isn’t discrimination, and the government can’t mislabel speech as discrimination to censor it,” she said in a statement.
Smith, who owns a Colorado design business called 303 Creative, does not currently create wedding websites. She has said that she wants to but that her Christian faith would prevent her from creating websites celebrating same-sex marriages. And that’s where she runs into conflict with state law.
Colorado, like most other states, has a law forbidding businesses open to the public from discriminating against customers. Colorado said that under its so-called public accommodations law, if Smith offers wedding websites to the public, she must provide them to all customers, regardless of sexual orientation. Businesses that violate the law can be fined, among other things. Smith argued that applying the law to her violates her First Amendment rights. The state disagreed.
The case is 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 21-476.
___
Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
11 comments
Dont Say FLA
June 30, 2023 at 11:48 am
Does this protection apply to consumers as well? If I engage a company but later discover they are Christian freaks, is that a legit out clause for ending the contract? One would figure yes, but I’d bet my bottom dollar this SCROTUS says “Heck No, buddy. The US Constitution only protects Christians. If you back out due to them being religious wackos, they are in the right and you owe them all the fees you contracted for, regardless whether or not they deliver”
R.Bruce
June 30, 2023 at 12:18 pm
If the “Christian Freaks” breach the contract, yes can back out with agreed to penalties. Next time you enter into a contract, include any conditions you want. If a “Christian Freak” company doesn’t agree to your terms, then hire another company.
Dont Say FLA
June 30, 2023 at 12:43 pm
Thanks for that, R Bruce. Now let’s say a Christian customer realizes they engaged a company run by gay freaks. Is that any different?
AI Dont Give a Shit
June 30, 2023 at 11:51 am
Rather than hire judgey churchy types, tell an AI bot what sort of website you want. 30 seconds later you’ll have your website, judgement free, and probably also just free free.
R.Bruce
June 30, 2023 at 12:13 pm
Basic contract law. Cannot force anyone to perform a “Special” service. Normal services were never denied.
Dont Say FLA
June 30, 2023 at 12:47 pm
How is copy pasting pictures of a gay couple into a WordPress wedding website template any different from copy pasting pictures of a straight couple into a WordPress wedding website template? Copy-Paste does not know what straight or gay even means. All it knows it “copy these 1s and 0s into memory” for the copy part, and “write these 1s and 0s to [the paste destination]” for the paste part.
Dont Say FLA
June 30, 2023 at 12:51 pm
Services were never requested. Turns out, they found a interior designer’s website, assumed he was gay, and then made up the part about the wedding website request. That designer is not gay. He is a straight man, already married to a woman. These “Christian” folks had zero ground for their suit, zero honesty, and yet, this SCROTUS decided to ban gays anyhow. This SCROTUS needs to be neutered.
Doan B. Leaf
June 30, 2023 at 1:10 pm
Oh my don’t liberals love freedom, though, unless it is freedom for people who don’t believe like they do.
Dont Say FLA
June 30, 2023 at 1:25 pm
Freedom to discriminate isn’t exactly freedom. But yeah, sometimes the correct call can be a hard one to make when both sides in a disagreement claim “freedom.” This call, however, shouldn’t even have been made considering the entire complaint was a fraud. This SCROTUS, being known by the company they keep, is looking more and more itself to be a fraud.
PeterH
June 30, 2023 at 1:17 pm
This woman had absolutely no standing before SCOTUS. She does not create web sites! As stated in this article:
“ Smith, who owns a Colorado design business called 303 Creative, does not currently create wedding websites.”
SCOTUS overstepped their purview and with reckless after hours activities by at least two conservative members of the court ….their actions are giving Americans pause that maybe we really need SCOTUS term limits.
Eduardine Slaveen Shampoo 👍
June 30, 2023 at 1:27 pm
Phoney cases brought before the illegitimate SCOTUS by Alex Jones using LARPers.. right wing sock puppets…to achieve nothing of impact to anyone. Maybe makes some conservative whacko feel better about Trump crime spree until the next 50 indictments drop. Meanwhile DEI more popular than ever now after the ruling and abortion pills more popular than M&M’s. Epic win 🤡
Comments are closed.