303 Creative LLC v. Elenis

This case involves Lorie Smith, owner of 303 Creative LLC, a Colorado-based graphic design company. Smith wished to expand her business to create custom wedding websites but opposed creating them for same-sex couples, citing her Christian beliefs. She challenged the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), which prohibits businesses from denying services based on sexual orientation, arguing it compelled her to speak messages against her faith. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Smith, holding that the First Amendment prohibits Colorado from forcing a website designer to create expressive designs speaking messages with which the designer disagrees. The Court reasoned that Smith’s services constituted "pure speech" and that forcing her to create wedding websites for same-sex marriages would be a compelled speech violation.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of 303 Creative LLC. The majority opinion, written by Justice Gorsuch, held that Colorado's CADA violated the First Amendment by compelling Lorie Smith to create expressive designs that convey messages contrary to her religious beliefs. The dissent argued the ruling opens the door to discrimination by granting a broad speech exemption to anti-discrimination laws.

The central dispute was whether a state public accommodation law requiring an artist to create expressive content for same-sex weddings violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, specifically regarding the prohibition against compelled speech versus the state's compelling interest in ensuring equal access to goods and services.

The ruling significantly expanded the scope of First Amendment protections for commercial expressive services, setting a precedent that religious business owners and creative professionals can refuse to provide custom, expressive goods or services for same-sex weddings. LGBTQ+ advocacy groups condemned the decision as a major setback for equality, fearing it greenlights a broader license to discriminate. Conversely, religious liberty and free speech organizations hailed it as a landmark victory protecting the right to dissent from popular views without government punishment.