Federal judge dismisses lawsuit from photographer who doesn’t want to shoot gay weddings

A federal judge in New York has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a “Christian” wedding photographer who demanded that the state’s nondiscrimination law be overturned, lest she be forced to photograph same-sex weddings.

The woman, Emilee Carpenter, of Elmira, filed suit earlier this year, claiming that New York’s nondiscrimination law violates her First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, and her Fourteenth Amendment right to due process.

Carpenter claims to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, and that weddings are meant to be “inherently religious and solemn events.” As such, by preventing her from turning away same-sex couples, Carpenter claims the nondiscrimination law’s protections for LGBTQ people in places of public accommodation will force her to “participate” in ceremonies that run counter to her religious beliefs, or pay fines of up to $100,000 if she refuses.(snip)

But U.S. District Judge Frank Geraci, Jr., of the Western District of New York, dismissed Carpenter’s lawsuit earlier this week, saying the court was “not persuaded” by Carpenter’s argument that the law’s protections should be partially gutted in order to grant a religious exemption to those, like her, who oppose same-sex marriages.

“As Plaintiff concedes, an ‘expressive’ service like hers is not fungible. Her photographs are a product of her personal ‘artistic discretion,’ ‘technical proficiency’ and ‘moral standards,’ and it is her ‘faith and eye for beauty’ that ‘shape her photography — from first click to final edit.’ While other photographers may operate in the same market, Plaintiff does not allege that they would deliver the same photographs she does,” Geraci wrote.

"[...] saying the court was “not persuaded” by Carpenter’s argument that the law’s protections should be partially gutted in order to grant a religious exemption to those, like her, who oppose same-sex marriages."

Is it possible that neither the judge or the photographer knows the photographer's 14th Amendment (14A) protections?

Excerpted from 14A:

"Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

The problem is this imo. Since since judges have relatively good job security, what's possibly going on is this. Democratic and RINO career lawmakers probably don't want to take responsibility for exercising their 14A power to make penal laws that discourage state actors from abridging rights that the states have amended the Constitution to expressly protect, 1st Amendment-protected freedom of religious expression in this example.

So instead of taking responsibility for what they were elected to do, lawmakers wrongly let judges and non-elected bureaucrats steal and exercise their legislative powers for them so that they they can keep their voting records clean and get reelected.

Also, consider that 14A is still alive and kicking in California!

UC Berkeley settles landmark free speech lawsuit, will pay $70,000 to conservative group (12.4.18)

In fact, those patriots who value their freedom of religious expression, note that Acts 22:23-29 shows us that Apostle Paul claimed his Roman citizenship to get out of a flogging.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised if taxpayers ultimately paid Berkeley's $70,000 settlement.

Insights welcome.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.