Public accommodations laws exist in many states, banning discrimination in areas such as housing, hotels, retail businesses, restaurants and educational institutions. And so on," Sotomayor wrote.įriday's decision followed one in 2018 in which the justices ruled in favor of a Denver-area baker who refused based on his Christian views to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. A large retail store could reserve its family portrait services for 'traditional' families. A stationer could refuse to sell a birth announcement for a disabled couple because she opposes their having a child. "A website designer could equally refuse to create a wedding website for an interracial couple, for example. Sotomayor warned that the ruling could cause a ripple effect of discrimination, particularly since the case was decided on free speech grounds, rather than religious rights. Smith called Friday's ruling a victory for all Americans, adding, "Colorado can't force me or anyone to say something we don't believe." She preemptively sued Colorado's civil rights commission and other state officials in 2016 because she said she feared being punished for refusing to serve gay weddings under Colorado's public accommodations law. Smith, who lives in the Denver suburb of Littleton, is an evangelical Christian who has said she believes marriage is only between a man and a woman. A 2020 ruling found that a federal law barring workplace discrimination protects gay and transgender employees. A 2015 decision legalized gay marriage nationwide. The justices in recent years had backed LGBT rights in major cases, though the court has since moved rightward. "More broadly, today's decision weakens long-standing laws that protect all Americans against discrimination in public accommodations - including people of color, people with disabilities, people of faith and women," Biden added. "In America, no person should face discrimination simply because of who they are or who they love," Biden said in a statement, adding that he fears the ruling could invite more discrimination.
0 kommentar(er)
