"Pickel and Black Bear say they still plan to seek legal action. "Everyone is floored, shocked and outraged," said Pickel. "We have contacted some of our friends who are activists."
You ever get the feeling that these people are just looking for outrage?
(I think I know the answer)
This hotel/motel is in interstate commerce and therefore the federal courts can easily get a piece of this action. State laws allowing or prohibiting are largely irrelevant.
Very few people understand this aspect of constitutional law, but one of the two critical court cases upholding the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was Heart of Atlanta Hotel v. Katzenbach (then US Attorney General). The USSC ruled that the hotel was in interstate commerce and, as such, the reach of the civil rights act extended to anyone who desired to stay at that hotel; the owners did not have the consitutional right to prohibit anyone based on race. In effect, the USSC ruled that the Civil Rights Act was constitutional b/c Congress had the authority under the Commerce Clause of Article I of the Constitution to regulate interstate commerce. One person, the court ruled, could have a significant impact on interstate commerce and therefore the statute was constitutional.
While sexual orientation is not yet a protected class under the Civil Rights Act, as amended, this case could be granted certiorari by the lower federal courts based on commerce clause or equal protection considerations.