[ad_1]
The judge refused to accept a case in which a Washington State flower shop was sanctioned for refusing to provide flowers for gay weddings.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday accepted the challenge of two families with children attending a Christian school on the Maine Tuition Assistance Program, which prohibits the use of taxpayers’ money to pay for religious education institutions.
The Supreme Court is composed of nine people 6-3 conservative majority, Refused to accept a Colorado flower shop’s refusal to provide services for same-sex weddings, and the lower court ruled that the flower shop violated the anti-discrimination law.
The announcement of the acceptance and rejection of the case on Friday marked the end of the Supreme Court’s current term, and finally a major ruling on Thursday with a 6 to 3 ideological route, which may make it easier for the states Establish voting restrictionsThe next term of the court will begin in October.
The judges agreed to hear an appeal from the families of children enrolled in Christian schools against a lower court ruling that Maine’s plan did not violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution to freely exercise religious rights.
A ruling against Maine could build on other court decisions in recent years that allowed public funds to flow to religious institutions.
The Boston-based Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled on these families last year, ruling that the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence did not prohibit states from prohibiting religious entities from providing public funds based on the use of these dollars.
On Friday, the Supreme Court rejected several appeals, including an appeal by Washington State for a florist who refused to arrange flowers for a same-sex wedding because of his Christian faith.
The Supreme Court needs at least four of the nine judges to hear cases. Only three conservative judges, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch said they would agree to hear the appeal of the flower shop and review the decision.
In 2018, the Supreme Court ordered the Washington State Court to review the case involving the flower shop Barronelle Stutzman and its Arlene’s Flowers business.
After review, the Washington State Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the state court ruled that Stutzman refused to provide flowers for the wedding of two gay men, Rob Ingersoll, on religious grounds, in violation of the state’s anti-discrimination laws, and No hostility to religion. And Curt Freed.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), representing Ingersoll and Fried, praised the decision as LGBTQ rights.
“Today, the Supreme Court confirmed that LGBTQ people should receive equal services when they walk into a store,” said Ria Tabacco Mar, an ACLU lawyer and ACLU women’s rights program director who represents the couple.
Ingersoll has been a customer of Stutzman’s flower shop for nearly ten years, and she knows he is gay. But she argued that his marriage to another man violated her religious beliefs and believed that she could not provide services for the event.
Washington State law requires companies that provide services to heterosexual couples to provide equal services to same-sex couples.
Ingersoll said in a statement: “We hope this decision will send a message to other LGBTQ people that no one should experience the harm we have done.”
In another case in 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a Colorado agency’s ruling on a baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding on narrow legal grounds.
The court did not rule on whether the baker’s behavior was discriminatory, but found that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed “religious hostility” towards the baker’s Christian beliefs.
[ad_2]
Source link
