Here's How Supreme Court's Rejection Of Anti-Discrimination Law May Impact LGBTQ+ People

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

54% : Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said a victory for Smith would be an important win for religious liberty, tweeting: "Compelled speech against anyone's religious beliefs is an egregious infringement on the most fundamental liberties our Constitution protects."
51% : The Supreme Court agreed to decide whether "applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment."
50% : The court has also ruled in favor of religious liberty in recent cases, including one ruling that state funds can be used to pay for religious schools and another ruling in favor of a school football coach who was punished for praying, potentially paving the way for more freedom for public school employees to express their religious beliefs.
48% : Kristin Waggoner, CEO of conservative legal firm Alliance Defending Freedom who conducted oral arguments for Smith, said the case is crucial for protecting the right to free speech and criticized Colorado's anti-discrimination law as giving "the government the authority to tell us what we can and can't say.""If 303 Creative wins here, we will live in a world in which any business that has an expressive service can put up a sign that says 'Women Not Served, Jews Not Served, Black People Not Served,' and claim a First Amendment right to do so," ACLU legal director David D. Cole told The New York Times prior to the court's decision.
48% : She intended to post a statement on her website clarifying her intent to only serve heterosexual couples because of her religious beliefs, and despite having never been asked by a same-sex couple to design a website, sued the state to challenge the law.
47% : Manhattan Institute director of constitutional studies Ilya Shapiro argued in a Newsweek column Smith's work as a designer involves compelled speech and would violate the "individual freedom of mind" that the court decided was protected under the First Amendment in Wooley v. Maynard (1977).
46% : Smith argued that as an artist, she should not be compelled to create content that clashes with her personal beliefs in the name of artistic freedom; namely, a website for a same-sex couple.
44% : A Supreme Court ruling that backs a graphic designer who argued for her freedom to refuse service to same-sex couples may have broader implications, which the court's liberal justices, activists and scholars fear will make it easier for businesses to claim free speech exemptions to deny service to LGBTQ+ customers and other marginalized groups.
44% : Fears that the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, could come after LGBTQ rights were heightened in the wake of the court's overturning of Roe v. Wade, which previously protected the right to abortion, in which Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the court should revisit decisions on same-sex marriage and birth control.
41% :Colorado's anti-discrimination law prevents discrimination against gay people by businesses open to the public.
39% : An American Civil Liberties Union amicus brief argues businesses should not be able to evade anti-discrimination laws on the grounds that the services provided are "artistic" or "expressive," stating that Smith's business is open to the public and should not be allowed to refuse service to customers based on identity.
37% :Supreme Court Rules Web Designer Can Deny Services To Same-Sex Couples (Forbes)
37% : Supreme Court Signals It May Side With Web Designer Who Wants To Refuse Same-Sex Couples (Forbes)Supreme Court Seems Ready to Back Web Designer Opposed to Same-Sex Marriage (New York Times)
34% : An amicus brief written by University of Pennsylvania law professor Tobias Wolff said ruling in favor of Smith would "destroy" the clarity of anti-discrimination law, sending the court down a path of "no discernable standards with no obvious stopping point" in which other businesses can argue for their own exemption from anti-discrimination laws.
32% : The court narrowly ruled in favor of the baker who refused services for a same-sex couple, though it did not create a free speech exemption to anti-discrimination laws at that time.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.