Faith Advocates: Religious Freedom ‘at Risk’ in Christian Website Designer Supreme Court Case

Same sex marriage wedding cake
Getty Images/YinYang

Religious liberty proponents spoke outside the Supreme Court during and after oral arguments on Monday in a case surrounding a Christian website designer who alleges that Colorado law would force her to design wedding websites for same-sex couples in spite of her convictions. 

Faith advocates warned of a potential point of no return, stating that First Amendment protections of religious freedom are “now at risk” if the Supreme Court does not side with artist Lorie Smith, owner of graphic design firm 303 Creative LLC.

“We aren’t just here fighting for Christians; we are here at the Supreme Court, asking them to protect all people’s unique faith and all people’s ability to operate in the public sphere without being told how to speak,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said. 

As Christians, we are instructed to do everything, including what we speak and how we work, as unto the Lord for His glory. That understanding of free speech and religious freedom has long been protected by the First Amendment, which is now at risk,” Perkins added. 

Family Research Council also posted to Twitter, calling on the Supreme Court to “ensure[s] that the government cannot abuse its power by coercing and silencing someone because it doesn’t like her beliefs.”

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the religious liberty legal organization representing Smith, wrote that “the First Amendment isn’t about Democrat vs. Republican or Christian vs. LGBT. It’s about one category: American.”

“All of us should be free to speak. None of us should be forced to speak. If one loses this right, we all lose,” the ADF continued. “When it comes to freedom, we’re all in this together.”

“#Freespeech belongs to everyone, not just those in power. The government can’t silence speakers just because it doesn’t like what they say. Political and ideological winds change but the Constitution consistently protects the expression of all beliefs. #CreateFreely #SCOTUS,” the ADF added. 

John Wesley Reid, editor-in-chief for the Standing for Freedom Center, warned that nations without free speech are subject to tyrannical leaders. 

“Places that don’t have free speech are being overcome by oppressive governments. And let’s not be so naive to think we are outside the reach of tyranny,” Reid said. 

Vic Bernson, vice president and general counsel to Young America’s Foundation, said the religious liberty case is about keeping the government from compelling speech. 

“303 Creative is first and foremost about reserving our freedom to think for ourselves, to not allow government to force us to speak certain words we’d rather not speak,” Bernson said. 

Smith herself spoke after oral arguments, stating that her “hope and prayer is that the Supreme Court will protect every American’s right to live and create freely.”

“A website is my canvass and I cherish the freedom to express unique and custom messages that celebrate causes I’m passionate about. My clients love my unique artwork, and I love working with them,” Smith said. “I love people and create for everyone, including those who identify as LGBT. Like other artists, my decision on what to custom create is always based on the message and never on the person requesting.”

“The government must respect everyone’s freedom to say what we believe and should never punish or coerce anyone simply because the government doesn’t like our beliefs,” she continued. “Free speech is worthy of protection. And a win for me is a win for everyone. Whether you live in Colorado or California or Florida or New York, it doesn’t matter. The right to speak freely is guaranteed to all of us.”

The Supreme Court agreed to answer one question in the case between Smith and the Director of the Colorado Civil Rights Division Aubrey Elenis, which was “whether applying a public accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.”

The Justices agreed to take up Smith’s case just four years after they ruled in favor of Colorado baker Jack Phillips. In that case, Phillips refused to make a cake for a same-sex couple because doing so violated his Christian beliefs. However, the justices did not rule on the central question in his case: whether being made to bake a cake for a same-sex couple violated his First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

The case is 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, No. 21-476 in the Supreme Court of the United States.

COMMENTS

Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.