Skip Navigation

Supreme Court Backs Web Designer Opposed to Same-Sex Marriage

www.nytimes.com Gay Rights Ruling: Supreme Court Backs Web Designer Opposed to Same-Sex Marriage

The decision appeared to suggest that the rights of L.G.B.T.Q. people, including to same-sex marriage, are on more vulnerable legal footing, particularly when they are at odds with claims of religious freedom.

Gay Rights Ruling: Supreme Court Backs Web Designer Opposed to Same-Sex Marriage

The justices settled a question left open in 2018: whether businesses open to the public and engaged in expression may refuse to serve customers based on religious convictions.

13

You're viewing a single thread.

13 comments
  • SCOTUS continues SCOTUSing.

    Ultimately, my thoughts are a bit mixed, and it really comes down to just how much leeway is given to businesses. I can understand an argument that a web site is a sufficiently creative and expressive work such that the government mandating a business take on a client is essentially compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment, and a secondary benefit is it being made abundantly clear that a gay baker wouldn't ever have to create a "Gays are groomers" cake or anything like that. I think the real question, and something I haven't seen much information on yet, is exactly where that line is. I'd like to think that a business owner simply refusing basic service because a customer is gay would still be something that a state can prohibit, and if not, I don't see how that doesn't opening up some legal room for "Whites only (because Jesus told me that in a dream)" signs - essentially legalizing any form of discrimination so long as it's hidden under the veil of religion. I'd imagine the Court really doesn't want to get into the business of deciding what a legitimate religion is.

13 comments