Washington: The US Supreme Court on Friday refused to hear the appeal by a flower seller fined by the state of Washington for refusing to make flower arrangements for same-sex marriage because of his Christian beliefs, beyond other major cases that complained Liberty.
After ruling in 2018 supporting a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for two people for reasons of religion, the judges turned the attraction by Barronelle Stutzman, the owner of the Arlene flower in the city of Richland, after a lower court of Washington.
action.
Stutzman rejected the service to the gay pair Robert Ingersoll and Curt was released in 2013.
Three of the six conservative judges court – Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch – said they would hear this case.
The appeal has been detained while the Supreme Court considers a separate case of religious rights involving the Catholic Church affiliate agency that sued after the city of Philadelphia refused to place children to care for organizations because they apply to being foster parents.
The court decided unanimously on June 17 supporting Catholic social services but leaving certain legal questions that have not been resolved.
The Washington country imposed a $ 1,000 fine on Stutzman for violating the anti-discrimination law and directed to make flower arrangements for same-sex marriage if he did it for the opposite wedding.
The Washington State Supreme Court enforced a fine.
This case raises two separate legal questions under the first amendment of the US Constitution.
Stutzman’s lawyer in the alliance of conservative Christian law groups defending freedom has argued that the country violates not only its rights to religious expression but the rights of their freedom too.
The last argument is based on the legal theory that regulating interest is a form of creative expression protected in the same way as free speech.
The flower case was similar to those who pushed the highest decision of the Supreme Court in the narrow legal yard in favor of the Denver-Area baker named Jack Phillips.
The court said in that case that the state civil rights commission that imposed sanctions on Phillips was motivated by anti-religious bias.
But the Supreme Court in the case did not resolve a wider question: in what circumstances what religious beliefs were quoted to win the release of punishment under the anti-discrimination law.
The judge chose not to use flower cases as another opportunity to do so.
Stutzman, a member of the South Baptist denomination, said the marriage must be exclusively between a man and woman, based on his Christian belief.
In the court newspaper, lawyer Stutzman said he and Ingersoll were friends before the incident and that he often gave him flowers for various purposes.
His lawyer also said he would sell pre-made settings for use in same-sex marriage, but not special settings.
When he refused to prepare special arrangements for Ingersoll’s marriage, he referred him to three other flower shops, according to the submission of a court.
The couple, represented by American Civil Liberties Union, said they were shocked and injured by Stutzman’s refusal, stopped planning a big wedding and held a small marriage in their home.
The Attorney General of Washington Robert Ferguson, a Democrat whose office demanded Stutzman, said in the Papers of the event version of Stutzman “never happened.” Ferguson said Stutzman immediately refused to serve Ingersoll before the customer even made a request.
The state sued Stutzman only after he refused to obey the law of anti-discrimination, Ferguson added.
The Supreme Court in 2018 disposed of the first verdict of the Washington Supreme Court against Stutzman considering the baker’s tall.
The Washington court in 2019 stands with its original findings that support the country.
Similar legal fights have been carried out in other countries after other small business owners including a wedding photographer and calligraphy refused to serve same-sex couples.
The Supreme Court in recent years has been in the center of collision between LGBT and religious rights.
It supports gay rights in a series of landmark decisions which culminated in the 2015 decision which legalized marriage of the same-sex national.
By 2020, the court expanded protection for LGBT workers under federal law.
The decision of Philadelphia Foster Care and Baker 2018 case is a loss for LGBT activists.