WA Supreme Court Upholds Arlene's Flowers Gay Discrimination Decision

SEATTLE, WA - The Washington state Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a Richland florist violated the state's anti-discrimination law when she refused to provide floral arrangements for a gay couple's wedding.

The case dates back to March 2013 when Robert Ingersoll asked Arlene's Flowers to make floral arrangements for his wedding to his partner, Curt Freed. Arlene's Flowers owner Barronelle Stutzman declined to provide flowers, citing her religious belief that marriage can only exist between a man and a woman. Ingersoll had been a longtime customer of the store.

After the decision was released Thursday, Stutzman told reporters that she intends to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Washington Supreme Court's ruling.

The Arlene's Flowers case is one of several around the U.S. where business owners have refused to serve gay couples citing religious beliefs. In 2014, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled that Masterpiece Cakeshop had erred in refusing to make a cake for a gay couple who were set to marry in Massachusetts. Such cases have spurred some states, like Mississippi and Indiana, to create "religious freedom" laws, which permit businesses to refuse service based on religious grounds.

On the other side, a judge in Florida last week ruled in favor of a bakery that refused to decorate a cake with an anti-gay message. The Cut the Cake bakery refused Arizona evangelist Joshua Feuerstein's request for a cake with "Homosexuality is an abomination unto the Lord" written on it.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson in 2013 sued Stutzman on behalf of Ingersoll and Freed. In 2015, a Benton County Superior Court judge ruled that she had violated the state's anti-discrimination law and the Consumer Protection Act in denying service to Freed and Ingersoll.

Stutzman argued that her services as a florist constituted artistic expression, and were therefore protected under the First Amendment. Attorney General Bob Ferguson argued that, as a business, Stutzman was required to provide equal service to all.

Nine state Supreme Court justices heard arguments in an appeal of the Benton County decision at Bellevue College in November. You can read the full decision here.

"The State of Washington bars discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation. Discrimination based on same-sex marriage constitutes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. We therefore hold that the conduct for which Stutzman was cited and fined in this case-refusing her commercially marketed wedding floral services to Ingersoll and Freed because theirs would be a same-sex wedding constitutes sexual orientation discrimination under the [Washington Law Against Discrimination]," the court wrote in its conclusion

Attorney General Bob Ferguson hailed the decision Thursday as a victory for equality.

Gov. Jay Inslee also reacted to the decision on Thursday.

"By ruling that intolerance based on sexual orientation is unlawful, the court affirmed that Washington state will remain a place where no one can be discriminated against because of who they love," Inslee said in a statement.

Image via Washington Supreme Court