Freedom of Association - Essential for Private Individuals and Private Enterprise
25 August 2013
New Mexico’s highest court ruled Thursday that the owners of an Albuquerque wedding photography company violated state law when they turned away a lesbian couple who wanted to hire them to take pictures of their ceremony.
Upholding a lower-court ruling, the New Mexico Supreme Court held that the company’s refusal was an act of discrimination. They rejected the argument of the devout Christian owners of Elane Photography who claimed they had a free speech and religious right not to shoot the ceremony.
The decision comes at a time of turbulent debate over gay marriage in New Mexico, where a county clerk gained national attention this week by issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples against the advice of the attorney general (though he’s not challenging it). As Law Blog noted earlier, gay marriage hasn’t been legalized New Mexico, though there’s a dispute over whether state law prohibits it.
Under the New Mexico Human Rights Act, it’s unlawful for a public accommodation to refuse to offer its services to someone because of the person’s sexual orientation. The same law also prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry and gender.
“When Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the NMHRA in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races,” the court stated in its opinion.
“Even if the services it offers are creative or expressive, Elane Photography must offer its services to customers without regard for the customers’ race, sex, sexual orientation, or other protected classification,” the court said.
Elaine Huguenin and her husband Jonathan, the owners of the company, argued that shooting the ceremony would have conflicted with their fundamental religious tenets and given the impression that they were supportive of gay marriage.
The Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented the photographers, said the decision amounted to government-enforced coercion. “This decision is a blow to our client and every American’s right to live free,” stated the group’s senior counsel, Jordan Lorence.
The case dates back to 2006 when Vanessa Willock asked the Huguenins to photograph a “commitment ceremony” that she and her partner were planning to hold in the town of Taos.
After getting turned down, the couple accused the company of discrimination in a complaint to the New Mexico Human Rights Commission. The state body found that the company engaged in sexual orientation discrimination and ordered Elane Photography to pay thousands of dollars in attorneys’ fees, which were waived by Ms. Hillock.
“When you open a business, you are opening your doors to all people in your community, not just the select few who share your personal beliefs,” said Louise Melling, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, in a statement. The ACLU filed a brief in support of Ms. Willock.
In a concurring opinion Thursday, Justice Richard C. Bosson said the case “provokes reflection on what this nation is all about.” The company’s refusal, “no matter how religiously inspired, was an affront to the legal rights of that couple,” he wrote.
“All of which, I assume, is little comfort to the Huguenins, who now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives,” Justice Bosson wrote. “Though the rule of law requires it, the result is sobering. It will no doubt leave a tangible mark on the Huguenins and others of similar views.”