Does operating out of their home make them not liable for the law they were convicted under?
Would it then not say that they are offering a service to the public?
I’d prefer some way of attacking that ruling rather than using a work-around. But legal help is expensive, so I understand the desire to do work-arounds.
Personally, I think the law violates their right to free exercise. If they wish to view their whole lives affected by their religion, then that is exactly what free exercise means.
To many are trying to interpret it as “free worship” which it isn’t.
Could they not position themselves as “Christian Business”, having only certain Religious designs?
“I’d prefer some way of attacking that ruling rather than using a work-around.”
My bet would be that they are simply trying to get a handle on their expenses. No doubt their landlord doesn’t like the commotion, so moving home is a recovery action.