East Central Reporter

U.S. Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) celebrated the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of a Christian web designer. 

The web designer, Lorie Smith, filed the lawsuit noting that she has a First Amendment right to create wedding websites exclusively for opposite-sex couples. The court noted in the case that the government cannot compel citizens to engage in creative acts against their conscience.

“Today, the Supreme Court upheld our Constitutional right to religious liberty and protected Americans from being forced to engage in speech and actions that violate our religious beliefs,” Miller said on Facebook. “Christians should not be compelled to bake cakes or create websites for causes that violate our deeply held religious beliefs. The Left is revealing their true agenda of compelled speech and their opposition to religious liberty with their outrage at this decision. I am grateful the Supreme Court defended Christians from the authoritarian leftists who want to punish American citizens for living our lives in accordance with our Christian faith.”

The 6-3 decision, divided along ideological lines, establishes an exception to anti-discrimination laws, allowing businesses engaged in expressive activities to refuse services for same-sex ceremonies. The ruling has been criticized by LGBTQ rights advocates, who argue that it provides a license to discriminate, while religious groups view it as a victory for freedom of speech and religious expression.

“Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority, according to Bloomberg. “The First Amendment protects an individual’s right to speak his mind regardless of whether the government considers his speech sensible and well-intentioned or deeply ‘misguided.’”

Smith wrote about her experience in a column published by Fox News.

“Colorado was violating my constitutional rights, so I filed a perfectly legitimate pre-enforcement lawsuit through my attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom. Full stop. I chose to file a pre-enforcement case because I knew Colorado could punish me if I created art consistent with my beliefs about marriage just like it has repeatedly gone after cake artist Jack Philips,” Smith wrote. “Rather than wait in fear and trepidation to be sued by Colorado or activists, I decided free speech is worthy of protecting, and I didn’t want to be muzzled by my own government.”

Smith said she is glad about the decision. 

“Thankfully, the Supreme Court said Colorado couldn’t do that to me. And the government can’t do that to you either, explained the ruling: ‘The opportunity to think for ourselves and to express those thoughts freely is among our most cherished liberties and part of what keeps our Republic strong,’" she wrote. “Despite this victory, I continue to face horrific attacks — people saying they wish I was dead, that I’d be raped, that they want to burn my house to the ground, that they know where I live and want to come kill my family, and the list goes on.”

Fox News also reported that after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Smith's challenge to Colorado's anti-discrimination law, some media outlets and liberal theorists tried to dismiss the ruling by highlighting that a customer mentioned in court filings seeking her services for a same-sex wedding appeared to be fake. However, legal experts debunked these arguments, emphasizing that Smith had legal standing to bring the case even if there was no actual customer involved. 

Smith's attorney and conservative voices also criticized the attempt to undermine the ruling, dismissing it as a "desperate, bad faith attempt" and asserting that all justices agreed on her legal standing. Gorsuch, in authoring the majority opinion, emphasized that Colorado's anti-discrimination law coerced individuals to compromise their conscience, and the ruling upheld the importance of tolerance and freedom of thought and speech guaranteed by the First Amendment.