The right wing movement to establish a constitutional right to refuse to provide services based on personal religious principles got a set back from SCOTUS today.
US supreme court declines appeal of photographer who refused gay couple
A conservative legal group specialising in defending businesses accused of discriminating against same-sex couples vowed to redouble its efforts Monday after the US supreme court declined to take up one of the group’s flagship cases.
In Elane Photography v Willock, a New Mexico photographer sued after a state human rights commission fined the photographer for its refusal in 2006 to work a same-sex commitment ceremony. The photographer said that to shoot the ceremony – an unofficial blessing as same-sex weddings were not carried out in the state at the time – would have violated the company’s Christian beliefs. The commission made the photographer pay the legal fees of the couple, Vanessa Willock and Misti Collinsworth.
An appeal of the decision by the photographer found its way to the New Mexico supreme court, which ruled in August 2013 that Elane Photography, run by Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin, had engaged in discriminatory business practices. On Monday the supreme court declined to revisit that decision.
The court does not issue statements about their reasons for declining to grant review of a specific case. So we really don't know exactly what this means. The business of liberty of conscience seems like an issue that will ultimately have to be settled by them. There are several states passing laws to grant such rights. What is likely to persuade SCOTUS to become involved is a series on contradictory lower court rulings on the matter that require a final resolution.
As issues of gay rights and marriage equality gain increasing political and legal traction they raise conflicts with various bastions of traditional privilege. There is still a long road ahead and a lot of battles to come, but the tide is turning.