A panel of three judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, in Denver, adopted the most rigorous form of judicial supervision over the law, but remained the same.
“Colorado has a compelling interest in protecting both the dignified interests of members of marginalized groups and their material interests in commercial market access.” Judge Mary Beck Briscoe wrote for the majority, adding that the law was narrowly tailored to address that concern.
“To be sure,” Judge Briscoe wrote, “LGBT consumers can get wedding website design services from other businesses; however, LGBT consumers will never be able to receive wedding-related services of the same quality and nature as those provided by protestors. ”
Judge Briscoe added that “Colorado may prohibit speech that promotes illegal activity, including unlawful discrimination.”
In disagreement, Chief Justice Timothy M. Tymkovichquoted George Orwell, saying that “the majority were of the remarkable – and novel – view that the government could compel Ms Smith to deliver messages that would violate her conscience.”
“Looks like we’ve moved from ‘live and let live,'” he wrote, “to “you can’t say that.”
Kristen Wagoner, an attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Ms. Smith, said the anti-discrimination law violates First Amendment protections for free speech. “Colorado has weaponized its law to silence speech it disagrees with, to force speech it approves of, and to punish anyone who dares to object,” she said in a statement.
Jennifer C. Pusher, an attorney with Lambda Legal, a civil rights organization focused on the LGBTQ community, said in a statement that the Supreme Court should “reaffirm and apply the longstanding constitutional precedent that rights Our freedom of religion and speech is not a license to discriminate when operating a business. ”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/us/colorado-supreme-court-same-sex-marriage.html The Supreme Court hears the case of a web designer who opposes same-sex marriage