Written by Don Byrd
Via Religion Clause, a decision by a New Mexico Appeals Court is sure to add fuel to the discussion over rights of conscience and service refusal. Elane Photography is a business owned by Christians who object to same-sex marriage and refuse to provide photography services. Sued by a couple denied service, the Appeals Court upheld a trial court’s ruling that the business violated anti-discrimination provisions of the New Mexico Human Rights Act.
The court rejected Elane Photography’s arguments that such an interpretation of the relevant statutes amounts to a violation of free speech and free exercise of the First Amendment, and is forbidden by New Mexico’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Some key excerpts (pdf):
Elane Photography advertises itsservices to the public at large, and anyone who wants to access Elane Photography’s website may do so. We conclude that Elane Photography is a public business and commercial enterprise. The NMHRA was meant to reflect modern commercial life and expand protection from discrimination to include most establishments that typically operate a business in public commerce. As a result, Elane Photography constitutes a public accommodation under the NMHRA definition and cannot discriminate against any class protected by the NMHRA.
…
Elane Photography categorically refuses to photograph same-sex weddings, and told Willock of this categorical refusal in an email. This categorical refusal constitutes direct evidence of impermissible discrimination based upon Willock’s sexual orientation and is a violation of the NMHRA.
…
[E]ven if a compelling state interest were required, we agree with the district court that the burden on freedom of religion experienced by Elane Photography is unclear.
…
“When followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes [that] are binding on others in that activity.” Lee, 455 U.S. at 253. The owners of Elane Photography must accept the reasonable regulations and restrictions imposed upon the conduct of their commercial enterprise despite their personal religious beliefs that may conflict with these governmental interests.
…
This does not deny Elane Photography the right to express its religious opinion. The owners are free to express their religious beliefs and tell Willock or anyone else what they think about same-sex relationships and same-sex ceremonies. However, like the landlord in Swanner and the owners of all other public accommodations, Elane Photography may not discriminate in its commercial activities against protected classes as the basis for expressing its religious opinion.
