Federal judge affirms religious rights of Christian photographer

A federal judge has affirmed the religious rights of a Christian photographer, ruling that the state cannot force its religious beliefs onto a business operator.

The fight over a decision by Emilee Carpenter to decline to promote same-sex ideology with her work, as the state of New York demanded, drew in a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court involving Colorado web designer Lorie Smith.

There, the justices ruled that the leftist state of Colorado was not allowed under the Constitution to force Smith to express beliefs that violated her Christian faith.

A report at Courthhousenews said the judge lobbied against the Christian photographer even while admitting that precedent required him to allow her to live by her faith.

The judge, Frank Geraci Jr., said the Supreme Court precedent required him to issue an injunction barring New York from its public accommodation laws “peculiarly to compel expressive activity.”

Carpenter had challenged the state’s religious agenda, which forced her to choose between a penalty of up to $100,000 or photographing same-sex duos, an activity that violated her faith.

She lost in 2022 but before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals could decide her case, the Supreme Court released the Lori Smith decision, about her 303 Creative corporation.

In fact, it is Colorado that has been on the cutting edge of losing faith disputes in the Supreme Court. It lost the 303 Creative case and also the Jack Phillips case several years earlier, when the state tried to demand he promote alternative sexual lifestyle choices with his bakery products. Colorado, in fact, was scolded for its “hostility” to Christianity in that case. And it now is demanding to control the statements and beliefs of counselors with a similar requirement, which also is pending before the Supreme Court.

The 2nd Circuit found New York’s law isn’t unconstitutional, but sent the case back to the lower court in light of the 303 Creative decision.

Geraci, appointed by Barack Obama,. now has ruled in favor of Carpenter on the specific issue, and noted that she still must comply with other parts of the accommodations law.

He praised those laws that discriminate, stating, “This is, in fact, the fundamental, praiseworthy purpose of public accommodation laws like New York’s. These laws ensure that ‘individuals in historically disadvantaged or disfavored classes desiring to make use of public accommodations’ receive ‘what the old common law promised to any member of the public wanting a meal at the inn — namely, that accepting the usual terms of service, they will not be turned away merely on the proprietor’s exercise of personal preference.'”

Carpenter was represented by the ADF, and spokesman Bryan Neihart said, “The U.S. Constitution protects Emilee’s freedom to express her own views as she continues to serve clients of all backgrounds and beliefs. The district court rightly upheld this freedom and followed Supreme Court precedent.

“Emilee can now enjoy the freedom to create and express herself, a freedom that protects all Americans regardless of their views.”