Dem Arizona AG claims she will refuse to abide by Supreme Court ruling on religious freedom

In an act of defiance against the Supreme Court's decision to protect religious liberty, Democrat Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes announced that her office will seek prosecution against businesses that refuse to serve to those that belong to a "protected class."

On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Colorado Christian web designer, Lorie Smith, who refused to work on same-sex wedding projects. In a 6-3 vote, the High Court decided that Smith has the right to refuse to endorse a message that she disagrees with based on the first amendment of the US Constitution.



Mayes strongly disagreed with the SCOTUS decision, calling the ruling "discriminatory" and "profoundly wrong," according to AZ Central.

"Today, a woefully misguided majority of the United States Supreme Court has decided that businesses open to the public may, in certain circumstances, discriminate against LGBTQ+ Americans," Mayes said following the verdict.

"While my office is still reviewing the decision to determine its effects, I agree with Justice Sotomayor — the idea that the Constitution gives businesses the right to discriminate is 'profoundly wrong,'" she added, referring to justice Sotomayor's dissenting opinion.
 

Furthermore, the Democrat AG released a statement which encourages people to come forward that believe they may have been discriminated against by a business based on their race, color, religion, or sex. Mayes explained that under Arizona's public accommodation law, discrimination is prohibited in public places.

"If any Arizonan believes that they have been the victim of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), national origin, or ancestry in a place of public accommodation, they should file a complaint with my office. I will continue to enforce Arizona’s public accommodation law to its fullest extent."

The case which SCOTUS ruled in favor, 303 Creative v. Elenis, summarizes that Smith "wants to expand her graphic design business, 303 Creative LLC, to include services for couples seeking wedding websites."

However, because the state of Colorado has similar public accommodation laws to Arizona, Smith worried that it would "compel her - in violation of the First Amendment - to create websites celebrating marriages she does not endorse."

Smith argued that as a creative professional, she has a right to free speech in the work that she participates in. She sued the state in 2016 for the antidiscrimination law that has businesses provide services that would otherwise go against their religious beliefs. 

The opinion, delivered by Justice Neil Gorsuch, siding with Smith, said Colorado "seeks to use its law to compel an individual to create speech she does not believe." Gorsuch added, "As surely as Ms. Smith seeks to engage in protected First Amendment speech, Colorado seeks to compel speech Ms. Smith does not wish to provide."

Joining the opinion were Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, John Roberts, and Brett Kavanaugh. 

Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed the dissenting opinion with Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. In the dissent, Sotomayor wrote that "the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class."