Supreme Court rules in favor of Christian web designer
Fox News anchor Shannon Bream and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley discuss the Supreme Court’s decision that the First Amendment allows a Christian graphic designer to decline to work on websites for same-sex weddings.
Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley explained Friday why the Supreme Court's ruling in favor of a Christian graphic designer was an "amazing moment" in history with regard to the First Amendment. In the 6-3 ruling, the court held that a Christian web designer could refuse to work on websites for same-sex weddings. The Fox News contributor explained the importance of the decision saying it "brought clarity to an area that was muddled and confused" for years.
SUPREME COURT HANDS RELIGIOUS FREEDOM WIN TO POSTAL WORKER WHO REFUSED TO WORK ON SUNDAY
JONATHAN TURLEY: These cases, Masterpiece Cakeshop, as well as 303 Creative, do not change the public accommodation laws. You cannot be refused to go into stores and buy items that are pre-made, for example, based on your race or your status. In fact, in Masterpiece Cakeshop, the owner said, No, we don't discriminate against anyone. We don't make any inquiries. It's only when you ask me to make a cake that expresses the celebration of a same-sex marriage, that it really confronts the religious views that I have, and I don't want to do that. So what the court is saying here is that with these types of creative products, it is speech. And for those of us in the free speech community, this is an amazing moment. This will go down as one of the most important free speech cases in the history of the court. It will go down as one of the most important cases Gorsuch has ever handed down, in my view. It is a huge victory because it brings clarity to an area that was muddled and confused. The court is making a very strong statement in favor of free speech.
(L) Justice Neil Gorsuch (R) Justice Sonia Sotomayor (Getty Images)
I'm mystified by the dissent. When [Justice Sonia] Sotomayor came up for confirmation, I noted that she had a troubling free speech case as an appellate judge. But that hasn't been as pronounced until today. I mean, her dissent really gives very little weight to the free speech concerns raised by many of us about these issues. In my view, the reason it's a free speech case is because, you know, I would feel the same way about Nazis going into a bakery and asking a Jewish baker to produce an anti-Semitic cake. Or to ask an African-American baker to produce a KKK cake. Various people have strong feelings that they don't want to be forced to express countervailing values. It doesn't mean they're right or they're wrong, but we have the ability to accommodate that. And what Gorsuch says, and it's a really beautifully written opinion, is he says we can accommodate that in this country, that we believe in pluralism, we believe in letting people have their own values. And so the distinction you drew is the most important of all. You must comply with public accommodation laws. This is a limitation of when you ask someone to do an expressive act in the form of a cake, a website, maybe a photographer.
Lorie Smith, owner of 303 Creative, poses at her studio in Littleton, United States on Nov. 15, 2022. (Rachel Woolf for The Washington Post via Getty Images)
The U.S. Supreme Court held that a Colorado graphic designer who wants to make wedding websites does not have to create them for same-sex marriages, in a landmark decision that pit the interests of LGBTQ non-discrimination against First Amendment freedom.
In a 6-3 decision issued Friday, the high court ruled in favor of artist Lorie Smith, who sued the state over its anti-discrimination law that prohibited businesses providing sales or other accommodations to the public from denying service based on a customer's sexual orientation.
Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the majority opinion, which said that, "In this case, Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance."
"But, as this Court has long held, 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," Gorsuch continued.
"But tolerance, not coercion, is our Nation’s answer. 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. Because Colorado seeks to deny that promise, the judgment is reversed," he concluded.
Fox News' Brianna Herlihy and Ronn Blitzer contributed to this report.
