The U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York issued a significant decision Thursday in Emilee Carpenter Photography v. James halting the state from forcing a photographer and blogger to create messages inconsistent with her faith as her case moves forward in court. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represent Emilee Carpenter and her studio in her lawsuit against the New York laws that violate her First Amendment rights.
Last July, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit returned the case to the lower court to rule whether New York’s laws could compel Emilee to create photographs and blogs expressing a message that contradicts her beliefs in light of the monumental decision 303 Creative v. Elenis. There, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that government officials cannot force artists to create speech that violates their religious beliefs. The district court agreed that New York’s law can’t force Emilee Carpenter to create messages that conflict with her faith.
“Free speech is for everyone, and more courts are ruling consistent with that message,” said ADF Legal Counsel Bryan Neihart. “As the Supreme Court reaffirmed in 303 Creative, the government can’t force Americans to say things they don’t believe. The U.S. Constitution protects Emilee’s freedom to express her own views as she continues to serve clients of all backgrounds and beliefs. The district court rightly upheld this freedom and followed Supreme Court precedent. Emilee can now enjoy the freedom to create and express herself, a freedom that protects all Americans regardless of their views.”
As the district court explained, “[f]rom start to finish, [Emilee] provides a customized, tailored photography service that is guided by her own artistic and moral judgment.” This, the court said, shows that Emilee’s photography “constitute ‘mediums of expression,’” that “are expressive activity protected by the First Amendment.”
New York’s laws threaten Carpenter with fines of up to $100,000, a revoked business license, and up to a year in jail.
Carpenter’s case is similar to 303 Creative, which involved Colorado graphic artist and website designer Lorie Smith. Smith challenged a state law that forced her to express messages that violated her beliefs. The Supreme Court concluded that the state of Colorado could not compel Smith to create content that contradicted her views on marriage. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the bedrock First Amendment principle that the government may not “seek[] to force an individual to speak in ways that alight with [the government’s] views but defy her conscience about a matter of public significance.”
