Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes is being accused of fear mongering in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis.
In a landmark decision Friday, the Court upheld free speech for all Americans stating, “as this Court has long held, the opportunity to think for ourselves and to express those thoughts freely is among our most cherished liberties and part of what keeps our Republic strong.”
“The U.S. Supreme Court rightly reaffirmed that the government can’t force Americans to say things they don’t believe. The court reiterated that it’s unconstitutional for the state to eliminate from the public square ideas it dislikes, including the belief that marriage is the union of husband and wife,” said Alliance Defending Freedom CEO and General Counsel Kristen Waggoner, who argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of Lorie and 303 Creative.
“Disagreement isn’t discrimination, and the government can’t mislabel speech as discrimination to censor it. Lorie works with everyone, including clients who identify as LGBT. As the court highlighted, her decisions to create speech always turn on what message is requested, never on who requests it. The ruling makes clear that nondiscrimination laws remain firmly in place, and that the government has never needed to compel speech to ensure access to goods and services.”
Nothing in the narrow decision allows businesses the right to discriminate.
“[T]he freedom to think and speak is among our inalienable human rights. . . . By allowing all views to flourish, the framers understood, we may test and improve our own thinking both as individuals and as a Nation,” the Supreme Court wrote in its opinion.
In fact, Arizona law prohibits discrimination in places of public accommodation, including discrimination because of sexual orientation and gender identity.
However, Mayes claimed that the decision is “woefully misguided,” and “that businesses open to the public may, in certain circumstances, discriminate against LGBTQ+ Americans.”
Attorney Jen Wright, who served under Mayes’ predecessor Mark Brnovich tweeted:
That’s literally not what the SCOTUS said, but considering Kris has never practiced law, I’m not surprised she’s confused.
Instead, the ruling confirmed that people providing expressive services cannot be compelled to use their artistic skills to say things they disagree with.
That’s literally not what the SCOTUS said, but considering Kris has never practiced law, I’m not surprised she’s confused.
Instead, the ruling confirmed that people providing expressive services cannot be compelled to use their artistic skills to say things they disagree with. https://t.co/lxlQZlU3WF
— Jen Wright (@JenWEsq) July 1, 2023
Republican politico, Sam Stone tweeted:
“Kris Mayes took the Sweetcake for stupid tweet of the day
A. Not what the ruling said
B. Her preferred outcome is called totalitarianism
Kris Mayes took the Sweetcake for stupid tweet of the day
A. Not what the ruling said
B. Her preferred outcome is called totalitarianism https://t.co/8HEcIDaZuF
— Sam Stone (@SamThePol) July 1, 2023
The only part of Mayes’ tweet that all parties agree on is that Arizonans who believe they have been denied equal access to public accommodations can and should file a complaint with her office.