Originally published June 30, 2023 7:43 am PDT
On Friday, a ruling by the Supreme Court concluded that businesses may reject services to same-sex couples if it opposes their religious convictions, upholding the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
This development is significant, as it emerges as an exception to the gradual push of LGBTQ ideology into the American mainstream.
The case in focus revolved around Lorie Smith, a web designer based in Colorado.
Smith specialized in the creation and sale of wedding websites but preferred not to offer this service to homosexual couples.
However, under the Colorado civil rights law, no business that provides services to the public can discriminate based on sexual orientation.
Smith argued that this law compels her to support ideologies that contradict her beliefs.
Smith made her views clear in an interview with Colorado Public Radio in December, stating, “The artwork that I create is speech,” and went on to clarify that, “those messages must be consistent with my convictions.”
The conservative-majority Supreme Court decided in favor of Smith, with a 6-3 majority.
The ruling stated that Smith’s First Amendment rights entitled her to refuse custom wedding website services to same-sex couples.
The First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wrote the majority opinion, declared, “The First Amendment’s protections belong to all, not just to speakers whose motives the government finds worthy. 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.”
“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. Colorado cannot deny that promise consistent with the First Amendment,” he affirmed.
Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, joined Gorsuch in this opinion.
Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett were appointed by then-President Donald J. Trump.
Conversely, Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed her disapproval in a dissenting statement.
“There has been a backlash to the movement for liberty and equality for gender and sexual minorities. New forms of inclusion have been met with reactionary exclusion. This is heartbreaking,” she wrote.
Reaf the full opinion below:
In another historic decision, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the race-based admissions programs of the University of North Carolina and Harvard College are in violation of the Constitution.
This ruling marked the end of an era of so-called “affirmative action” in college admissions, effectively dismantling a policy that has prevailed for over half a century.
The judgment in the University of North Carolina case was decided 6-3, falling along ideological lines, while the Harvard case saw a 6-2 ruling, as Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson stepped back from the case.
Chief Justice John Roberts penned the majority opinion, which received support from Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.
In the majority opinion, Roberts stated: “The Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause. Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points. We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today.”
