ruled against Smith, finding that her proposal to post a statement outlining her objection to promoting same-sex weddings “proposes an unlawful act because it proposes to do something — deny services to same-sex couples — that a different statute, the Accommodations Clause, prohibits.”Smith appealed that decision, but on Monday, a three-judge panel for the 10th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals rejected her appeal, arguing it had a responsibility to protect the “dignity interests” of marginalized groups protected under the nondiscrimination law.In its ruling, the court ruled 2-1 that businesses that open themselves up to the public must provide services for same-sex marriages if they offer the same services for opposite-sex weddings.
Read more on metroweekly.com