Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court declines to hear religious freedom photography case
cna ^ | April 8, 2014 | Adelaide Mena

Posted on 04/08/2014 4:30:39 AM PDT by NYer

Elaine Huguenin, co-owner of Elane Photography in Albuquerque, N.M. Photo courtesy of Alliance Defending Freedom.
Elaine Huguenin, co-owner of Elane Photography in Albuquerque, N.M. Photo courtesy of Alliance Defending Freedom.

Washington D.C., Apr 8, 2014 / 04:13 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The U.S. Supreme Court has decided not to weigh in on a case involving a small Christian-owned photography business that declined on religious grounds to shoot a same-sex commitment ceremony in 2006.

The court announced its decision April 7. It did not give a reason for declining to hear the case.

“Only unjust laws separate what people say from what they believe,” said Senior Counsel Jordan Lorence of Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, owners of Elane Photography.

“The First Amendment protects our freedom to speak or not speak on any issue without fear of punishment,” he added in an April 7 statement.

“We had hoped the U.S. Supreme Court would use this case to affirm this basic constitutional principle; however, the court will likely have several more opportunities to do just that in other cases of ours that are working their way through the court system.”

The case, Elane Photography v. Willock, involves the Huguenins' decision not to photograph a New Mexico same-sex commitment ceremony in 2006, due to their religious convictions that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. At the time, neither same-sex “marriage” nor civil unions were recognized by New Mexico law.

Elaine Huguenin explained to the couple that participating in the ceremony by photographing it would communicate views she did not espouse, but offered to photograph them in other venues.

In the past, Huguenin has declined other photography jobs that she could not reconcile with her religious beliefs, including nude shoots and gory shots to promote a horror movie.

The same-sex couple then found another photographer who charged a lower rate. However, in 2008, they filed a complaint against Elane Photography for “sexual orientation discrimination.”  

The case was presented to the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, which ruled in 2009 that the company was guilty of discrimination and must pay nearly $7,000 to the couple.

The Huguenins appealed the case to the New Mexico Supreme Court, which upheld the ruling in August 2013. In his concurring decision, Judge Richard C. Bosson acknowledged that the Christian photographers were being “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives,” but said that this compromise is “part of the glue that holds us together as a nation” and is “the price of citizenship.”

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case means that the lower court’s ruling will stand.

Religious freedom advocates have voiced concern over what they see as growing hostility toward anyone who defends marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Numerous lawsuits are currently underway challenging the right of individuals to express their religious beliefs through their business decisions.

David Cortman, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, said that the owners of Elane Photography and many other marriage defenders “have been more than willing to serve any and all customers, but they are not willing to promote any and all messages.”

“A government that forces any American to create a message contrary to her own convictions is a government every American should fear,” he added.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, called the high court's decision not to hear the case “deeply disturbing.”

“Does our nation's highest court really believe the price of citizenship is the surrender of conscience?” he asked in an April 7 statement.

“The Supreme Court ignored an opportunity to reaffirm the basic principle that the government may not trample on fundamental rights of free speech and the free exercise of religion,” Perkins added.

“These rights do not stop at the exit door of your local church, and instead extend to every area of a religious person's life.”


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: elanecase; firstamendment; glbt; homosexualagenda; scotus

1 posted on 04/08/2014 4:30:39 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; GregB; Berlin_Freeper; SumProVita; narses; bboop; SevenofNine; Ronaldus Magnus; tiki; ...

Catholic ping!


2 posted on 04/08/2014 4:31:02 AM PDT by NYer ("You are a puff of smoke that appears briefly and then disappears." James 4:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, called the high court’s decision not to hear the case “deeply disturbing.”

The Supreme Court only hears a small amount of cases. I am anxiously waiting on Holly Lobby….I hope they vote right on this one. That could be the most important case of the year.


3 posted on 04/08/2014 4:34:14 AM PDT by napscoordinator ( Santorum-Bachmann 2016 for the future of the country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Wait....while Hobby Lobby is indeed important, you don't think a case where a person chooses NOT to do business with another party because of their beliefs isn't?

This is a hell of a lot more important than the healthcare law. This is an outright rejection of the First Amendment!

4 posted on 04/08/2014 4:38:20 AM PDT by Solson (The Voters stole the election! And the establishment wants it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

People need to just say they can’t fit the job into their schedule from now on there is no need to elaborate by pointing out a religious problem.


5 posted on 04/08/2014 4:42:31 AM PDT by Burkean (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
So much for there being three branches of government. The Judicial branch doesn't count when it punts on something this important.

There was once a colony where they hated rule by men instead of by law so much that they revolted against the most powerful empire on earth and suffered along until they won. I'm gonna look up the name of that country and see if there's anything those of us living in the US of Authoritarian could learn from those people.

6 posted on 04/08/2014 4:52:01 AM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Next up, forcing Christians to shoot porn. Film at 11!


7 posted on 04/08/2014 4:57:16 AM PDT by bolobaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

Dont hols your breath the American public has been wussified into submission and are now good little subjects


8 posted on 04/08/2014 5:03:35 AM PDT by Jarhead9297
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Burkean
"People need to just say they can’t fit the job into their schedule . . . "

Yeah, forget the First Amendment and all the freedom crap, just make an excuse the Queer Mafia will accept for a while and when they stop accepting that excuse, make up another.

That whole, Bill of Rights thing is sooo last century anyway.

9 posted on 04/08/2014 5:10:52 AM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jarhead9297
I hear you brother.

Those of us with threads on the head thought they were serious about the, "die on you feet instead of living on your knees", stuff but apparently that was just a marketing slogan to get a few dimwits like me to do the dirty work back in the day.

Semper Fi

10 posted on 04/08/2014 5:15:18 AM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Before jumping to conclusions... is this one of those cases that tries to “fast track” past the normal appeals process and go straight to the USSC? Looking at the article, I don’t see one federal appeals court listed - is it not customary for a case to go through there District and Circuit courts before the USSC, except for very rare situations?

If so, I can see the USSC declining without comment and letting the lower courts tackle it first.


11 posted on 04/08/2014 5:16:08 AM PDT by kevkrom (I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Burkean

Clever, but I’m sure their religious beliefs also preclude lying.


12 posted on 04/08/2014 5:19:11 AM PDT by Genoa (Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYer

She looks like a sweet young lady who simply loves God and photography. The perfect prey for the Godless and cowardly gay agenda.


13 posted on 04/08/2014 5:20:37 AM PDT by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Genoa; Burkean
Or maybe it depends on emphasis: "I can't fit you into my schedule." :-)
14 posted on 04/08/2014 5:23:06 AM PDT by Genoa (Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom

That is a very good question. Anyone?


15 posted on 04/08/2014 5:36:55 AM PDT by Buggman (returnofbenjamin.com - Baruch haBa b'Shem ADONAI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Buggman

Do they ever comment if it’s just a matter of referring a case to a lower appeals court? I guess that’s the question.


16 posted on 04/08/2014 5:39:28 AM PDT by Genoa (Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Fear of the Gay Mafia reaches deep into the chambers of the nation’s Highest Court.


17 posted on 04/08/2014 5:45:18 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: kevkrom

Or, that the ruling in Hobby Lobby’s case would similarly affect this one.


19 posted on 04/08/2014 5:55:33 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NYer

In the meantime photogs are just going to have to accept the jobs but have “car trouble” and miss the actual appointment.


20 posted on 04/08/2014 5:59:37 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Nine black-robed chickens. The Supreme Court should be eliminated if it can’t protect the rights of the Christian minority in this country.


21 posted on 04/08/2014 6:03:39 AM PDT by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SECURE AMERICA

Where are the names of the people bringing this suit, I can see “Willock” but that’s where it always ends,
We need to have photos and names of these people. The pictures and names need to be front and center in the public eye so we know who these people are.


22 posted on 04/08/2014 6:35:22 AM PDT by canuk101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

It was Vietnam.


23 posted on 04/08/2014 6:35:22 AM PDT by TheCorinthian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Supreme Court = Term limits


24 posted on 04/08/2014 7:00:22 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
“The Supreme Court ignored an opportunity to reaffirm the basic principle that the government may not trample on fundamental rights of free speech and the free exercise of religion,” Perkins added.

They didn't ignore it...By letting it stand, they confirmed it...It will now become precedence...

25 posted on 04/08/2014 8:07:56 AM PDT by Iscool (Ya mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailer park...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

There are at least 5 crooked lawyers with black robes on the SC.


26 posted on 04/08/2014 8:39:30 AM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson