Lorie Smith, the Christian web designer who sparked a landmark Supreme Court decision.Photo:Rachel Woolf for The Washington Post via Getty Images
Rachel Woolf for The Washington Post via Getty Images
On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to allow a Christian web designer to refuse her services to LGBTQ+ people, a historic decision that walks back hard-fought human rights battles and paves the way for businesses to legally discriminate based on a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
And while Smith’s caseechoes the 2018Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commissioncase — in which the Supreme Court sided 7-2 with a baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple — the web designer’s argument was at first merely hypothetical, in that she didn’t actually have any would-be customers who are gay.
Here’s more about Smith, and what made the precedent-setting case so unique.
Lorie Smith, a Christian graphic artist and website designer in Colorado (left), prepares to speak to supporters outside the Supreme Court.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
Smith’s Case Was Hypothetical
Smith’s lawsuit was built largely around a hypothetical scenario, in that she had not actually designed any wedding websites or tried to turn away same-sex couples when she sued.
Still, Smithfiled suitin Colorado in an attempt to block the enforcement of its anti-discrimination law, arguing that when shedoesbegin designing wedding websites, she should not be forced to design them for LGBTQ+ clients, because creating messaging that she disapproves of would oppose her religious beliefs and potentially violate her right to free speech.
Months later, Smith’s legal team said that she had, in fact, received an inquiry to design a gay couple’s wedding website after the suit was filed. Smith submitted a sworn statement about the inquiry, along with a copy of the “same-sex wedding request,” as evidence.
She still lost the case. And the appeal. Then the Supreme Court agreed to hear her out.
The Gay Couple Cited as an Example in Smith’s Case Reportedly Did Not Exist
Included in filings for the303 Creativecase is an alleged request that came from a man seeking help with a gay wedding website. But asThe New Republicreported on Thursday, the man identified in the request says he never filed it.
The New Republiccites court filings from Smith showing that a man named Stewart contacted her in September 2016 about his wedding to Mike, which he said was taking place “early next year.” He added that the couple “would love some design work done for our invites, placenames etc. We might also stretch to a website.”
But this week — whenThe New Republicgot ahold of the Stewart whose name, email address, and cell phone number were included on that “same-sex marriage request” — the man told the outlet he did not send the form, and that he was married to a woman at the time it was allegedly sent.
“If somebody’s pulled my information, as some kind of supporting information or documentation, somebody’s falsified that,” Stewart told the outlet. “I’m married, I have a child — I’m not really sure where that came from? But somebody’s using false information in a Supreme Court filing document."
AsThe New Republicnotes, it’s unclear whether the inquiry from “Stewart” included in the initial court filing was ever verified.
Protesters stand outside the Supreme Court in December 2022 during oral arguments in the case of ‘303 Creative LLC v. Elenis’.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
AsThe Guardianreports, the group has spent millions of dollars in an attempt to curtail LGBTQ+ rights, and has been involved inmany cases across the U.S.that deal directly with transgender rights.
ADF’s attempts to strip rights from the LGBTQ+ community come amid a wave of 2023 bills specifically targeting queer and transgender people.
source: people.com
