A ruling by a federal appeals court has breathed new life into a lawsuit brought against New York state by an Elmira wedding photographer.
Early in 2021, Emilee Carpenter, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of New York's anti-discrimination laws.
Carpenter's suit claims a requirement of the laws — if she photographs weddings between a man and a woman she must do likewise for same-sex couples — violates her Christian beliefs and constitutional rights.
But in a ruling released later that year, U.S. District Judge Frank P. Geraci Jr. concluded Carpenter's complaint has no merit and dismissed it.
In the wake of a favorable U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a similar case, the Alliance Defending Freedom appealed Geraci's decision, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals this month ruled Carpenter's lawsuit can proceed.
"Free speech is for everyone. As the Supreme Court reaffirmed in 303 Creative, the government can’t force Americans to say things they don’t believe," said ADF Legal Counsel Bryan Neihart. "The U.S. Constitution protects Emilee’s freedom to express her own views as she continues to serve clients of all backgrounds and beliefs."
What is argued in Carpenter's lawsuit
Carpenter, a 2016 graduate of Mansfield University, said she's gotten multiple requests from same-sex couples to photograph their weddings.
She feared being penalized for not honoring those requests by state agencies authorized to enforce anti-discrimination laws.
Those penalties can include fines of up to $100,000, a revoked business license, and up to a year in jail, according to the Alliance Defending Freedom, an Arizona-based conservative Christian nonprofit advocacy group.
The suit specifically named the state Attorney General's Office and Attorney General Letitia James in her capacity as the primary enforcer of the state's anti-discrimination laws.
Also named as codefendants are the commissioner of the state Division of Human Rights and Chemung County District Attorney Weeden Wetmore.
Geraci rejected Carpenter's arguments.
"New York’s public accommodation laws are neutral," Geraci wrote in his opinion. "(Carpenter) raises no non-conclusory factual allegations that the laws were enacted with any kind of religious (or anti-religious) motivation."
How a Supreme Court ruling applies to Carpenter's case
In 303 Creative LLC v. Elanis, Colorado-based website designer Lorie Smith wanted to include services for couples seeking wedding websites.
But like Carpenter, Smith believed a marriage should be between one man and one woman, and feared Colorado's anti-discrimination laws would force her to create websites celebrating marriages she didn't endorse.
Her lawsuit seeking an injunction to prevent the state from forcing her to violate her religious beliefs was rejected by a federal judge and an appellate court before the Supreme Court ruled in Smith's favor.
"Ms. Smith seeks to engage in protected First Amendment speech; Colorado seeks to compel speech she does not wish to provide," the Supreme Court stated in its written decision.
"If she wishes to speak, she must either speak as the state demands or face sanctions for expressing her own beliefs," the ruling stated. "That is an impermissible abridgement of the First Amendment’s right to speak freely."
Based on the Supreme Court's ruling in the Colorado case, the Alliance for Defending Freedom filed an appeal of Geraci's dismissal of Carpenter's lawsuit with the Second Circuit.
The appellate court reinstated the case and remanded it back to the district court for reevaluation in light of the 303 Creative ruling.
"Carpenter has alleged that she exercises artistic license to create customized and original images that express her religious views about marriage," the appellate panel wrote. "Carpenter has plausibly stated a compelled speech claim because the Accommodations Clause of New York’s Human Rights Law requires her to extend her photography services to same-sex weddings."
UtilitiesNY utilities offering credits for those facing long power outages. Are you eligible?
What happens next in Carpenter's lawsuit
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals did not rule on the merits of Carpenter's case, but ordered the district court to reexamine it using the Supreme Court's Creative 303 ruling as a guide.
The appellate court also denied Carpenter's request to issue a preliminary injunction that would prevent the state from enforcing the law while the suit is in progress, but directed the district court to reconsider that issue as well.
“The Supreme Court concluded that the state of Colorado could not compel Smith to create content that contradicted her views on marriage.," Niehart said. "We urge the district court to uphold this freedom and follow Supreme Court precedent so that Emilee can speak and create consistent with her convictions."
Follow Jeff Murray on Twitter @SGJeffMurray. To get unlimited access to the latest news, please subscribe or activate your digital account today.
Most Popular
Comments / 0