Supreme Court Could Soon Take Hatchet to Anti-Discrimination Laws Based on Entirely Fabricated Case

thenewcivilrightsmovement.com:

303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, has echoes of another case that was decided a few years ago, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado.Both cases involve a small business owner (in the latter a baker, the former a website designer), who claim that Colorado’s anti-discrimination law prohibits them from exercising their faith and conscience and compels them to endorse same-sex marriage in their services, and both are represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a far-right legal organization considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.But there’s one interesting difference, notedThe New Republic: in 303 Creative, the business owner, Lorie Smith, wasn’t even asked to design a website for a same-sex couple in the first place, and the claim they are compelled to do so was entirely fabricated.“Unlike the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, which at least involved real customers wanting a real cake, there is no wedding website,” wrote Melissa Gira Grant. “No person has hired Smith to create a wedding website.

In fact, Smith has never designed a wedding website, according to her petition to the court. As such, there is no client Smith has told she is rejecting due to her stated religious beliefs that marriage is only allowed between one man and one woman.

In the absence of all that, ADF has, instead, fashioned Smith as the victim of an injury that has never occurred.”READ MORE: Trump rages at Fox News for using ‘absolute worst’ photos of himRather, Smith’s argument is that the fear of potentially being asked to design a website for a same-sex couple has prevented her from going into the wedding website business entirely, depriving her of the free expression of doing so.