By Zoe Strozewski
Staff Writer
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The Supreme Court decided Friday that it would not hear the case of a florist who refused to provide her services for a same-sex couple's wedding. The decision not to hear the case leaves in place an earlier ruling that she violated state anti-discrimination laws.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch said they would have reviewed the ruling, but four justices are needed for the court to hear a case.
For more reporting from the Associated Press, see below.
Read More
Is Stephen Breyer Conservative or Liberal?4 min read
SCOTUS Rules California Must Stop Collecting Information on Top Charity Donors3 min read
Nadler, Cohen Working on ‘Updated’ Voting Rights Act in Response to SCOTUS Decision3 min read
...
In 2018, the high court ordered Washington state courts to take a new look at the case involving florist Barronelle Stutzman and her Arlene's Flowers business. That followed the justices' decision in a different case involving a Colorado baker who declined to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.
After that review, the Washington Supreme Court ruled unanimously that state courts did not act with animosity toward religion when they ruled Stutzman broke the state's anti-discrimination laws by refusing on religious grounds to provide flowers for the wedding of Rob Ingersoll and Curt Freed.
Stutzman had sold Ingersoll flowers for nearly a decade and knew he was gay. But she contended his marriage went against her religious beliefs and she felt she could not provide services for the event.
Washington state law says businesses offering services to opposite-sex couples must provide the same service to same-sex couples.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines