Supreme Court decides whether web designers can decline same-sex marriage

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether web designers can refuse to create wedding websites for same-sex couples in a case that could have far-reaching implications for the fight for LGBTQ rights. rice field.

Since the country’s supreme court handed down a landmark 2015 ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, judges have argued that serving same-sex couples violates their constitutional rights. It has faced a series of lawsuits involving houses, bakeries and other marriage-related businesses. .

Courts have largely sidestepped the fundamental questions raised in these cases: Is denial of service to an LGBTQ customer on the grounds of religious objection unlawful discrimination, or is it a First Amendment lawsuit? Are you protected by

Lorie Smith, a graphic and website designer in Denver, intends to develop a wedding site, but wants to decline offering services for same-sex marriage. She sued the Colorado Division of Civil Rights and other state agencies in her 2016 accusations that the state’s antidiscrimination laws violated her First Amendment rights to free speech and religious practice. claimed to be

By agreeing to file the lawsuit on Tuesday, the High Court limited its appeal to consider only the free speech claim. The court declined to hear another question raised by the lawsuit. Whether Colorado law violates religious liberty precedent and whether courts should consider overturning that precedent.

A panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Denver last year backed Colorado. The two-for-one decision showed that the state has a strong interest in protecting members of her LBGTQ community from discrimination.

“Governments do not have the power to silence or coerce creative expression under the threat of punishment,” said Kristen Wagoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom, who represents Smith in the case. It’s shocking that the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has allowed Colorado to punish artists who make speeches that are inconsistent with the ideology endorsed by the US Court of Appeals.”

Democratic Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said the state would “vigorously defend” the legislation.

“The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that anti-discrimination laws like Colorado’s apply to all businesses that sell goods and services.” You can’t just turn down an LGBT customer.”

The Supreme Court will probably hear arguments in this case in the fall.

Colorado baker Jack Phillips challenged the same antidiscrimination law in a Supreme Court case four years ago.

In 2018, a divisional court exonerated Phillips over discriminatory allegations that he refused to make custom wedding cakes for same-sex couples, finding the state displayed “religious enmity” toward him. The court did not resolve the broader question of whether opponents of same-sex marriage, including florists, photographers and videographers, could refuse commercial wedding services to LGBTQ couples.

The government cannot impose regulations that are hostile to a citizen’s religious beliefs, a 7-to-2 majority wrote in the decision, but the ruling was specifically limited to its treatment of Colorado’s Phillips. It was handed down when Vice-Judge Anthony Kennedy, a swing voter who defended, was included in the High Court.

Since then, Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion in the Masterpiece Cakeshop lawsuit involving Phillips, and deputy judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a credible liberal voter, have replaced the deputy judge nominated by President Donald Trump. was given.

Baker:Supreme Court ruling on bakery that rejected same-sex couples

Florist:SCOTUS will not hear case of florist who refused service to same-sex wedding

In July, the Superior Court dismissed a similar petition from a Washington state florist who denied arranging same-sex marriage. He said he would file a lawsuit. The move resulted in a state court ruling against the flower shop.

LGBTQ rights groups said the decision to hear arguments in the Smith case is an opportunity to resolve outstanding issues that the High Court has avoided.

“It’s time to end once and for all these companies’ attempts to undermine the civil rights of LGBTQ people in the name of religion,” said senior legal counsel for the LGBTQ rights group Lambda. Jennifer Pizer said, “The constitutional protections for freedom of religion and freedom of speech were never intended as weapons of discrimination.”

Source link

What's Hot

Supreme Court decides whether web designers can decline same-sex marriage

Share this:

Related Posts

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Subscribe to Updates