Supreme Court takes up anti-gay website designer’s case

metroweekly.com:

claims she will do some work for LGBTQ clients, but cannot create custom-made wedding websites. She further claims that the products she creates are a form of “artistic expression” that should be protected under the First Amendment, and therefore, she should be exempt from having to abide by Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act.Smith’s lawsuit was dismissed in May 2019, on the grounds that she had filed suit before the state had taken any action against her — or before she had even been asked to create a website for a same-sex couple — and thus, had no grounds to sue.

A federal district judge ruled against her in September 2019, finding that her proposal to post a statement outlining her objection to promoting same-sex weddings “proposes an unlawful act” because it proposes to illegally deny services to same-sex couples on the basis of their sexual orientation.

Smith then appealed the decision to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.In July 2021, the appeals 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.

The majority found that the Accommodation Clause of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act was “narrowly tailored” to the state’s interest in ensuring “equal access to publicly available goods and services.”“Excepting Appellants from the Accommodation Clause would necessarily relegate LGBT consumers to an inferior market because Appellants’ unique services are, by definition, unavailable elsewhere,” Senior Judge Mary Beck Briscoe wrote, rebuffing claims made by Smith’s lawyers that LGBTQ individuals should simply seek out similar services elsewhere.