U.S. Supreme Court may allow some companies to exclude gay clients

The United States Supreme Court this Monday expressed its intention to give a reason to the creator of “websites” who refuse to develop some of them for gay marriage, in the name of her freedom of speech and her Christian faith.

“For the first time in its history,” this court will be able to authorize a company to “refuse to serve a customer on racial, gender, or religious grounds,” Judge Sonia Sotomayor noted with excitement on Monday.

Along with two progressive colleagues, the judge warned during the hearing of a possible ruling that could open the door to discrimination of all kinds.

The six conservative US Supreme Court justices seem more receptive to the arguments of Lori Smith, head of Colorado-based 303 Creative.

“I want to create unique websites to celebrate the beauty of marriage between a man and a woman. But Colorado is trying to force me (…) to promote ideas that are contrary to my faith,” said Laurie Smith, quoted by France-Press.

Since 2008, this western US state has banned merchants from discriminating against their customers based on their sexual orientation, under threat of a fine.

This businesswoman was not accused by any homosexual couple and was not prosecuted by the authorities, but filed a complaint against the law as a preventive measure. After losing the appeals court, he went to the highest court in the United States.

This is not the first time that the Supreme Court, which recognized the right to same-sex marriage in 2015, has been called upon to arbitrate between gays and Christian traffickers.

In 2018, this authority reached an agreement with a confectioner who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. However, it then based its decision on additional considerations without promulgating important principles.

Since then, Republican Donald Trump (2017-2021) has solidified his conservative majority, and the Supreme Court could issue a broader ruling by June 30.

The White House has already called for restraint, with US presidential spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre saying at a press conference that “there is no reason to change the current balance.”

The administration, led by Democrat Joe Biden, believes that all Americans “have the right to equal access to a society that includes goods and services” for sale in the country, he added.

During the hearing, lawyer Laurie Smith argued that this was not homophobic discrimination, but rather a defense of the “artist’s” freedom of expression.

The law does not cover the content of products, but obliges to offer them to all buyers, objects, in turn, a lawyer from Colorado Eric Olson.

For this lawyer, Laurie Smith can decorate her “websites” with biblical messages about marriage “between a man and a woman,” but she can’t refuse to sell them to gay couples.

But for Conservative Judge Amy Coney Barrett, this businesswoman refuses to create marriage “websites” for divorced heterosexuals or adulterers as well, which means “what matters is the message, not the couple’s sexual orientation.”

Judge Samuel Alito defended “noble people who oppose same-sex marriage” by refusing to compare them to “those who have opposed marriage between black and white Americans in the past.”

“Historically, opposition to interracial marriage and integration has often been justified on religious grounds,” said African-American Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor also wondered what the limit is if someone thinks that people with disabilities should not get married.

“Hairdressers, gardeners, plumbers… can’t invoke the First Amendment to stop same-sex marriage, but it’s different for artists,” protested Conservative Conservative Judge Brett Kavanaugh.