A federal court has ruled in favor of a Christian photographer who challenged nondiscrimination laws she believes would require her to work same-sex weddings despite her religious beliefs.
This case is the most recent example of U.S. courts upholding protections for religious liberty.
In an opinion released on Tuesday, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky sided with photographer Chelsey Nelson in her legal dispute with Louisville over its ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, or refusal of services on these grounds.
Judge Benjamin Beaton, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, authored the ruling.
Nelson, a devout Christian who believes marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman, states that she does not offer photography services for same-sex weddings to prospective clients. She filed a lawsuit claiming that the city’s nondiscrimination rules violated her First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, as well as Kentucky’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
While the federal court sided with Nelson in 2022, preventing Louisville from enforcing the nondiscrimination law against her, she appealed the denial of her request for nominal damages, and the city also appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in an attempt to overturn the ruling against the city’s laws.
In 2023, following a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in 303 Creative v. Elenis, the case was returned to the lower court for further proceedings. The Supreme Court’s decision, which held that states cannot compel speech through expressive activity, set a binding legal precedent for cases involving religious liberty.
Because of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Sixth Circuit sent Nelson’s case back to the lower court, and Tuesday’s decision signifies the final resolution of these legal efforts.
The court not only reaffirmed the previous rulings that prohibit Louisville from enforcing its nondiscrimination laws against Nelson but also awarded her nominal damages.
Nelson responded to the ruling by stating, “The government can’t force Americans to say things they don’t believe, and state officials have paid and will continue to pay a price when they violate this foundational freedom.”
Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal nonprofit representing Nelson, explained that “Nominal damages are a type of compensation that remedy past harm, prevent future misconduct, and vindicate constitutional freedoms.”
In response to the ruling, ADF Senior Counsel Bryan Neihart stated, “Free speech is for everyone.”
He continued, “As the Supreme Court held two years ago in 303 Creative v. Elenis, Americans have the freedom to express and create messages that align with their beliefs without fear of government punishment.”
Neihart added, “For over five years, Louisville officials said they could force Chelsey to promote views about marriage that violated her religious beliefs.”
According to Neihart, “The First Amendment leaves decisions about what to say with the people, not with the government. The district court’s [decision] rests on this bedrock First Amendment principle and builds on the victory in 303 Creative.”