Conservatives slam Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett for siding with liberals and declining to hear appeal of Southern Baptist florist who refused to sell flowers to a gay couple for their wedding

• e-mail

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to hear an appeal by a florist fined by Washington state for refusing to make a flower arrangement for a same-sex wedding because of her Christian beliefs, dodging another major case pitting gay rights against religious liberty.

The justices turned away an appeal by Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene's Flowers in the city of Richland, after a lower court upheld Washington's action. 

The court offered no explanation of its decision but three of the court's conservative judges - Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch - said they would have heard the case.

Conservatives turned on Trump appointees Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett for siding with liberals on the court.

'This is a disgrace. Kavanaugh and Barrett deserve derision and criticism for this,' said Ryan Williams, president of the Claremont Institute.

Conservatives turned their fire on Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh after it emerged they sided with the majority in deciding not to hear the appeal by Arlene's Flowers. They were both appointed by former President Trump but have shown an independent streak in their time on the Supreme Court so far

Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene's Flowers in the city of Richland, was fined $1000 for refusing to make a flower arrangement for a gay wedding. Washington state said she had violated its antidiscrimination laws

The court offered no reason for declining to hear the case, as is its usual practice. Conservatives Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch said they wanted to hear the Arlene's Flowers case

The case hinges on tension between anti-discrimination laws and First Amendment rights, with Stutzman's lawyers arguing that her right to freedom of religion had been infringed.

'Religious people should be free to live out their beliefs about marriage,' they said in in trying to persuade the Supreme Court to hear her case.

The decision comes days after the court handed down a unanimous ruling that a Catholic foster agency in Philadelphia could refuse to screen same-sex couples as potential parents for religious reasons. 

Stutzman's case is similar to a case that came before the court three years ago, when a baker refused on religious grounds to make a wedding cake for two men.

On that occasion, justices ruled 7-2 in favor of Masterpiece Cakeshop, but did not offer a broader rule about pitting anti-discrimination rules against religious freedom.

Conservatives rounded on Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh - both Trump appointees - for failing to say they would hear the case

Stutzman refused service to gay couple Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed in 2013.  

Stutzman, a member of the Southern Baptist denomination, believes that marriage should be exclusively between a man and a woman. 

In 2019, Washington state's Supreme Court ruled that she discriminated against the couple and her lawyers vowed to take the case to the US Supreme Court.

The state court previously ruled against Stutzman in 2017, but was ordered to reconsider the case after the Masterpiece Cakeshop result. 

The Washington Supreme Court ruled unanimously that state courts did not act with animosity toward religion when they ruled Stutzman broke the state's anti-discrimination laws.  

Robert Ingersoll (left) and Curt Freed (right) sued when Stutzman, the owner of Arlene's Flowers in Richland, Washington, refused to do the flowers for their wedding 

American Civil Liberties Union declared victory when the Supreme Court said it would not be taking up Stutzman's appeal against her fine for discriminating against gay customers

The Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian group which brought the case, said it would fight on.

'Barronelle Stutzman kindly served a gay customer for years before declining to make art for a ceremony that's sacred in her religion,' it said on Friday.

'She was sued & persecuted for acting on deeply held beliefs. SCOTUS' decision not to hear this case is disappointing - but our fight isn't over.'

Her lawyers pursued a two-pronged approach. Not only did they say the state had violated her right to religious freedom, they also argued that arranging flowers was a form of creative expression and thus protected under free speech provisions.

The result disappointed conservatives who believed Trump's appointees had secured a solid right-wing majority on the court, providing an ally in the country's culture wars.  

Last month Kavanaugh and Barrett also sided with the majority when they declined to rule against Obamacare.

'Where in the world is Amy Coney Barrett?' asked conservative columnist Josh Hammer on Friday.

However the outcome was  welcomed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

'The Supreme Court confirmed that LGBTQ people should receive equal service any time they walk into a store,' it said. 

'The decision lets stand the Washington State Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling that the Constitution does not grant a license to discriminate against LGBTQ people.' 

Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson said it was a victory for equality.  

'Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court puts an end to our case, and sends a message to the entire country that everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation, should be treated equally under the law,' he said.