The Arlene's Flowers lawsuit refers to a merged group of lawsuits brought by a gay couple (supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, and by the State of Washington) against a florist's shop, Arlene's Flowers of Richland, Washington, United States, after shop owner Barronelle Stutzman declined to provide a floral arrangement for the couple's wedding. The lawsuits gained national attention due to their religious and civil rights implications.
Video Arlene's Flowers lawsuit
Legal case
The first two legal cases, Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers and State of Washington v. Arlene's Flowers were consolidated by Benton County Superior Court Judge Salvador Mendoza into a single case for purposes of discovery.
The first civil suit, Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers, was filed by a gay couple after Stutzman denied floral arrangements for their wedding. The couple had been customers of Stutzman's shop for nine years, but when they asked her to provide flowers for their wedding, the florist declined, citing her "relationship with Jesus Christ." The ACLU represented the couple, Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed, in their lawsuit against the small business on grounds of discrimination. ACLU attorneys proposed a settlement in the suit if she publicly apologized, donated $5,000 to a local LGBT youth center and stopped refusing to service people due to sexual orientation. The Alliance Defending Freedom countered the case stating the small business should not be required to violate deeply held religious beliefs.
The second lawsuit was a consumer protection suit, State of Washington v. Arlene's Flowers, filed by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson in order to uphold Washington state's Consumer Protection Act. The case would have been settled with a penalty of $2,000 under the Washington Consumer Protection Act, a $1 payment for costs, and agreement not to discriminate in the future. However, Stutzman responded that she would not comply, citing the state's constitution 'freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment'. On January 7, 2015, Benton County Superior Court Judge Alexander Ekstrom ruled the owner was personally liable, concluding that Arlene's Flowers must provide full wedding support for same-sex ceremonies, including custom design work to decorate the ceremony, delivery to the forum, staying at the ceremony to touch up arrangements, and assisting the wedding party.
The third lawsuit, Arlene's Flowers v. Ferguson, was filed as a countersuit by Stutzman to claim financial damages caused by the previous two lawsuits.
On February 18, 2015, Judge Ekstrom ruled that she had violated the state's anti-discrimination law in both cases. On February 19, 2015, Stutzman stated she would appeal the ruling. On March 27, 2015, Judge Ekstrom ordered Stutzman to pay a $1,000 fine, plus $1 for court costs and fees.
Stutzman had received over $174,000 in individual donations on GoFundMe, prior to GoFundMe removing her donation page citing a violation of the website's terms of service, which bar fundraising campaigns that it deems "discriminatory."
On November 15, 2016, state Attorney General Ferguson personally argued the case before the Washington Supreme Court at its hearing, which was held before an audience in Bellevue College's auditorium. On February 16, 2017, the state Supreme Court unanimously ruled against Stutzman, holding that her floral arrangements do not constitute protected free speech, and that providing flowers to a same-sex wedding would not serve as an endorsement of same-sex marriage. Rejecting Stutzman's Free Exercise Clause claim, Justice Sheryl Gordon McCloud wrote "this case is no more about the access to flowers than civil rights cases were about access to sandwiches."
Stutzman has appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Maps Arlene's Flowers lawsuit
See also
- LGBT rights in Washington (state)
- Freedom of religion in the United States
- Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission
References
External links
- Arlene's Flowers official website
Source of article : Wikipedia
0 Comments