• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom®

ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom®

religious liberty and religious freedom news

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Articles
  • Podcast
Home » Arizona: High court finds card makers can refuse same-sex wedding invite requests

Arizona: High court finds card makers can refuse same-sex wedding invite requests

September 18, 2019 by ReligiousLiberty.TV

Brush and Nib wedding invitation - from Facebook

On September 16, 2019, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that a Phoenix city ordinance cannot require a business to create same-sex wedding invitations in violation of their sincerely held religious beliefs.

Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of Brush & Nib Studio, LC, who create custom hand-made wedding cards, filed a pre-emptive lawsuit against the city of Phoenix to prevent enforcement of its Human Relations Ordinance against their business. The ordinance also stated that violations would constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor, meaning that violators could face up to six months of jail time.

The court found that even though Duka and Koski’s beliefs about same-sex marriage “may seem old-fashioned, or even offensive to some,” the “guarantees of free speech and freedom of religion are not only for those who are deemed sufficiently enlightened, advanced, or progressive. They are for everyone.”

Citing the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision National Institute of Family & Life Advocates v. Becerra (NIFLA), 138 S. Ct. 2361 (2018), the Arizona court said the government “must not be allowed to force persons to express a message contrary to their deepest convictions.”

The majority also said that the business was not seeking to discriminate based on LGBT status, but rather did not want to communicate a particular message. “The fact that Plaintiffs’ message-based refusal primarily impacts customers with certain sexual orientations does not deprive Plaintiffs of First Amendment protection.”

The decision indicates that the decision is specifically intended to protect the type of speech presented in the wedding invitation cards that the court was shown, and does not invalidate the application of the Phoenix ordinance to other businesses.

As this case did not arise within the context of federal law, which currently does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual-discrimination, and was based solely on a city ordinance, this particular case was resolved with finality by the Arizona Supreme Court. However, similar cases are expected to be taken to the U.S. Supreme Court which is slated to hear argument on whether Title VII civil rights protections extend to sexual orientation on October 8, 2019, in R.G. and G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC and in Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda.

 

 

 

Photo: Facebook Photo/Brush & Nib

Filed Under: Discrimination, Free Speech, Marriage

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Kevin James says

    September 18, 2019 at 11:43 am

    The Hands On Originals t-shirt case in KY, which the state supreme court heard at the end of August, will most likely take the same direction.

Primary Sidebar

Geneva, Switzerland - December 03, 2019: World Health Organization (WHO / OMS) Headquarters - DepositPhotos.com

Biden admin could hand over US control of health emergencies to WHO next week

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The ultimate control over America’s health care and its national sovereignty will be put up for a vote next week at a meeting of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) governing legislative body, the World Health Assembly (WHA).  On May 22-28, 2022, the 75th World Health Assembly will convene at the United Nations […]

Statement on the Leak in Dobbs

The leak was intended to disrupt the processing of the decision and we are not going to dignify the leak or the unidentified leaker by analyzing it prematurely. As a constitutional republic we cannot go down that road without doing severe damage to the institution of the Supreme Court where there must be professional courtesy between the justices and their staffs.

Boston City Hall - photo from Supreme Court Opinion

Supreme Court rules 9-0 that Boston violated 1st Amendment in refusing Christian flag at City Hall

This morning the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Shurtleff v. Boston (Dec’d 5/2/2022) that the city of Boston violated the free speech rights of a Christian group when it refused to allow them to participate in a city flag raising program.

Active Liberty - a survey of Justice Stephen Breyer's religion clause jurisprudence - Supreme Court

Active Liberty: A Survey of Justice Stephen Breyer’s Religion Clause Decisions

A comprehensive review of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer’s decisions in Free Exercise and Establishment Clause cases.

Canadian gov’t calculates that expansion of assisted suicide will save taxpayers millions of dollars

In Canada, it is easier for the disabled who do not suffer terminal illness to get approval for assisted suicide than approval for affordable housing. The government has calculated the cost of providing healthcare versus providing assisted suicide.

Random Quote

These establishments metamorphose the church into a creature, and religion into a principle of state, which has a natural tendency to make men conclude that Bible religion is nothing but a trick of state.

— John Leland

Get the ReligiousLiberty.TV Newsletter!

Comes out a couple of times a month. Unsubscribe anytime automatically, no questions asked.
* = required field
unsubscribe from list

powered by MailChimp!

Copyright © 2022 Founders' First Freedom is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Articles
  • Podcast
0
0
0
0