Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch interrogated Colorado‘s solicitor general Monday, asking whether the state forced a Christian baker to undergo a “reeducation program” when he refused to create a custom cake celebrating same-sex marriage on the basis that it goes against his sincere religious beliefs.
Gorsuch’s remark toward Colorado Solicitor General Eric Olson (D) came during oral arguments surrounding a Christian web designer who petitioned the justices over her refusal to create a customized webpage celebrating a same-sex marriage if a client commissioned her to make such a product.
<mediadc-video-embed data-state="{"cms.site.owner":{"_ref":"00000161-3486-d333-a9e9-76c6fbf30000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b93390000"},"cms.content.publishDate":1670870804657,"cms.content.publishUser":{"_ref":"0000016c-3f1f-d321-af7d-7f5f071a0000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"cms.content.updateDate":1670870804657,"cms.content.updateUser":{"_ref":"0000016c-3f1f-d321-af7d-7f5f071a0000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"rawHtml":"
var _bp = _bp||[]; _bp.push({ "div": "Brid_70870799", "obj": {"id":"27789","width":"16","height":"9","video":"1204697"} }); ","_id":"00000184-e80b-da74-a1bd-ea9b07f60000","_type":"2f5a8339-a89a-3738-9cd2-3ddf0c8da574"}”>Video Embed
CHEATING SPOUSES, BLACK SANTA, KKK: SUPREME COURT JUSTICES DIVE INTO WILD HYPOTHETICAL ARGUMENTS IN FREE SPEECH CASE
The high court gave a small victory to baker Jack Phillips in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission in 2018 when it ruled 7-2 that the commission acted with atypical religious animus in 2012 when it ordered Phillips and his work staff to undergo anti-discrimination training. The decision did not make a judgment on the compelled speech issue at the core of the case, which justices are poised to answer in the 303 Creative v. Elenis case heard Monday.
“Mr. Phillips had to go through a reeducation program, did he not?” Gorsuch asked Olson. The solicitor general replied that “it was training to educate” Phillips about the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act.
“Some would call that a reeducation program,” Gorsuch said. Olson said he “strongly” disagreed.
“Isn’t religious belief a protected characteristic?” Gorsuch added, to which Olson conceded, “Yes.”
In addition to undergoing the training program, Phillips was also forced by the commission to submit quarterly reports about his company’s compliance status.
Unlike Phillips’s previous high court case, justices were tasked Monday to take up 303 Creative not on designer Lorie Smith‘s sincere religious beliefs but rather if the First Amendment protects her from being compelled to create a message that contradicts her beliefs.
Smith’s attorney, Kristin Waggoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom, said that because of Colorado’s “aggressive enforcement” of the anti-discrimination law, her client’s “speech has been chilled for six years.”
Colorado argued that Smith’s website business qualifies as a public accommodation that required her to serve every member of the community, including creating custom webpages for same-sex couples that would be celebrating such unions, which violate her religious convictions.
Although the six Republican-appointed justices appeared to be swayed by Smith’s arguments, the three Democratic-appointed justices raised hypothetical arguments about how a ruling favoring Smith could extend further and allow vendors to refuse service on the basis of race.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“How about people who don’t believe in interracial marriage or people who don’t believe disabled people should be married?” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, asked. “Where’s the line?”
A ruling in 303 Creative v. Elenis is not expected until sometime next year.
