The Arizona Court of Appeals has upheld a city ordinance that requires two Christian business owners to provide services for same-sex weddings despite their religious objections.
Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, the owners of stationary and calligraphy company Brush and Nib, filed a lawsuit in 2016 to challenge a Phoenix ordinance that could subject them to steep fines if they refuse to create invitations for same-sex weddings.
The business owners, who were represented in court by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), sought a preliminary injunction to prevent the ordinance from taking effect, but the request was dismissed by Judge Karen Mullins of the Maricopa County Superior Court in October.
On June 7, Mullins' decision was upheld by the Arizona Court of Appeals, stating that Duka and Koski "cannot discriminate against potential patrons based on sexual orientation."
In his ruling, Judge Lawrence Winthrop contended that the case was not about free speech, but about conduct.
"While such a requirement may impact speech, such as prohibiting places of public accommodation from posting signs that discriminate against customers, this impact is incidental to properly regulated conduct," Winthrop wrote, as reported by Arizona Capitol Times.
"Simply stated, if appellants, as an economic entity, want to operate their for-profit business as a public accommodation, they cannot discriminate against potential patrons based on sexual orientation," the judge continued.
The appellate court decision came just days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Christian baker, who refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding.
The high court ruling, however, was only focused on the decision of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission when it found the baker guilty of violating the state's anti-discrimination law, and did not address whether businesses can refuse to provide services for gay weddings.
Winthrop argued that the Arizona court ruling does not force the women to endorse same-sex marriage. He said that Duka and Koski are allowed to post a statement declaring their beliefs that marriage is between one man and one woman, but they are not allowed to post discriminatory messages that indicate their intention to refuse services for same-sex weddings.
"Or they may post a disclaimer that the act of selling their goods and services to same-sex couples does not constitute an endorsement of their customers' exercise of their constitutional right to marry or any other activities," the judge stated, as reported by the Arizona Capitol Times.
Jonathan Scruggs, an attorney for the ADF, decried the appellate court decision, saying it "contradicts basic freedoms our nation has always cherished." He has expressed intention to seek a review by the Arizona Supreme Court.
