Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

The following comment is from an informal legal newsletter that circulates to 1st Amendment lawyers. The background is the case of a gay couple "setting up" a photographer they knew to be a devout Christian. The case should disgust photographers because if other jurisdictions follow the NM court, it means that we can be forced to photograph anything no matter how abhorrent to us. (For example, how about forcing a vegetarian photographer to document a ranching operation or a slaughterhouse?)

============

The case involving Elaine Photography, the New Mexico wedding photographer who declined to photograph a lesbian “commitment ceremony” was denied cert. by the USSC. The stupid decision by the court below therefore becomes final. The wedding photographer had declined for religious reasons, and was sued by the couple. Elaine argued that forcing her to photograph the ceremony was compelled speech and therefore violated her 1st amendment rights. The plaintiffs claimed that the photo studio, like a restaurant, store or dry cleaner, was a place of public accommodation that was not allowed to refuse a customer.

The court below reasoned that in trying to determine what was “compelled speech” where the speaker is protected by the 1st Amendment, it could not distinguish between the creativity and “expressive speech” involved in making a wedding cake and that involved in photographing a wedding, and therefore it would refuse to undertake that task. Honest. That was its stated reasoning. And completely undercut by long-standing authority that photography, like writing, painting or sculpture is a creative activity, is expressive speech and is protected by the 1st Amendment. And that for the state to compel speech is an even worse violation of the 1st Amendment than barring speech.

To clarify matters, consider this hypothetical: Elaine, rather than being a photographer, is a poet who sets up a business of writing poems praising and glorifying events and the persons involved, e.g. (There were lots of such ode writers in the Middle Ages; there still are a few.) The same couple comes to Elaine the Ode Writer and wants an ode glorifying them and their commitment ceremony. Isn’t forcing the poet to create such an ode obviously compelled speech? There is no principled distinction between that hypothetical and the Elaine case; a photographer uses her skill and creativity to create an ode to the event in visual terms rather than words. Indeed, Elaine Photography’s case is stronger than that of Elaine the Ode Writer, because the photography requires close interaction...

The Sup. Ct. should be ashamed that it couldn’t find 4 honest justices to grant certiorari and decide the case one way or the other.

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

3 Ways You Can Legally Refuse Service to Customers http://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2013/06/3-ways-you-can-legally-refuse-service-to-customers.html
3. Religious Reasons for Refusal.
Many small business owners have deep religious convictions which not only guide their spiritual lives but also how they run their businesses.
For example, some religious business owners in the bridal industry have stood behind their beliefs that same-sex couples should not be married, and in some cases have refused to do business with gay couples seeking to wed.
But many states' laws prohibit businesses from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. Still, that hasn't stopped some small business owners from testing that law, The Huffington Post reports.

Restaurants: Right to Refuse Service http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/restaurants-right-to-refuse-service.html

Right to Refuse Service https://www.google.com/search?q=Right+to+Refuse+Service

Anna M-W Loc: New York City

You can not discriminate against anyone for those reasons she has now cornered the market for the ultra conservative Christian wedding. she could have easily not shot the wedding if she wanted to what she wanted was to make an issue out of it. the court does not have to give all the crackpots left or right in the country a day in court.

Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

You misunderstand the facts. The photographer didn't "make an issue out of it." The gay couple set her up and then "made an issue" out of it by suing the photographer. The gay couple could easily have found another photographer who didn't care about the sexual orientation, but instead they set up the Christian photographer and then sued her. Neither of the two sides were "crackpots." One was a clever and vindictive plaintiff, the other was a deeply religious Christian trying to adhere to her Christian beliefs.

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

Sorry Shooter but you're way off on this one. You cannot compare a slaughterhouse to a gay couple. For one, the couple consists of two people who have the same rights as all other people.
You may think in your mind that the photographer was "set up" but the reality is she could have just declined without comment and there wouldn't have been a case at all. Instead she chose to make it a case and failed.
Remember when you open for business, you serve the public, not just the public you like.

Anna M-W Loc: New York City

Well put

Anna M-W Loc: New York City

The photographer did make an issue out of it by saying "I don't do gay weddings" that is making an issue if it.

RRS Loc: Not sure

Misunderstood the facts or is on the other side of the tracks. When I was photographing weddings I always had the option of not booking the event. There were places that were just horrible photographically as I had worked the place before and I would point it out. I always did the formal shots first and if they wanted the shots afterwards then someone else did their wedding. Last bet not least if I didn't feel comfortable with the client then I would not book. They had the right not to book me and I had the same right too. There was one minister that was so hard to work with that no photographer would ever do another wedding in that church. Times are a changing and I'm so glad that I'm out of that business!

Robert Graybeal Loc: Myrtle Beach

There is NOTHING and I mean NOTHING that you can say or do that will change the mind of a Christian hater or Gay lover.
They are worse than liberals.

Like a rattlesnake ... just let 'em be.

Anna M-W Loc: New York City

What has anyone said that could be said to betake them a christian hater or gay lover. Please be as specific as you can.

Robert Graybeal Loc: Myrtle Beach

You want names?
You all know who you are!
I'm taking my own advice.
"just let 'em be."

tomw

You seem to have changed the facts. As I read it, the
photographer declined the assignment and was sued by the engaged couple. I agree with you that the court should have rejected the case - it was silly.

FrumCA

I'm not entirely clear on the 'law' behind the court's decision but it appears to be biased towards a 'business' who refused service in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I wonder if there would have been grounds to sue if a non-business, private photographer who was approached to do a similar job but turned it down due to religious beliefs.

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

Why would a couple of sexual deviant biological errors want a photographer who doesn't approve of their desire for getting married to record their ceremony? It would be like going to a restaurant knowing that the chef disdains you and my slip something very foreign in your food. The photographer may end up shooting some very unflattering photos.

Robert Graybeal Loc: Myrtle Beach

The deviants DIDNOT want the photographer to record their ceremony. They wanted to raise hell and make a stink and be ugly.