Supreme Court Allows Religious Exemptions from Anti-Discrimination Laws in 303 Creative v. Elenis

Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause prohibits states from enforcing anti-discrimination laws against businesses providing “expressive” services when doing so would compel speech that violates the owner’s religious beliefs. Justice Gorsuch authored the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. The case involved Colorado website designer Lorie Smith, who sought to refuse creating websites for same-sex weddings based on her religious objections, challenging Colorado’s public accommodations law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. Gorsuch framed wedding websites as “expressive in nature” and wrote: “When a state public accommodations law and the Constitution collide, there can be no question which must prevail.” The majority held that while public accommodations laws are not per se unconstitutional, businesses cannot be compelled to create expressive work violating their values. The decision was brought by Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal organization with deep ties to the Federalist Society and religious right movement. Although Smith’s objections were religiously motivated, the Court’s analysis focused on free speech rather than religious freedom, setting up future religious exemption claims. Justice Sotomayor’s dissent, joined by Kagan and Jackson, condemned the ruling for allowing discrimination: “Colorado’s law targets conduct, not speech, for regulation, and the act of discrimination has never constituted protected expression under the First Amendment.” Gorsuch’s opinion embraced the Christian nationalist theory that anti-discrimination law enforcement itself discriminates against conservative Christians. The decision leaves undefined what constitutes “expressive activity,” opening the door for businesses providing any creative or customized services to claim exemptions from civil rights laws. Legal experts warned the ruling could be extended to justify discrimination against interracial couples, religious minorities, and other protected groups. The decision represents another victory for the Federalist Society’s project to subordinate civil rights protections to religious liberty claims, following Masterpiece Cakeshop (2018) and Hobby Lobby (2014). Combined with the Court’s other rulings dismantling civil rights protections, 303 Creative advances a plutocratic, theocratic vision allowing powerful actors to discriminate while claiming victimhood.