Justices may decide if vendors can snub "gay weddings"

Richard Wolf usatoday.com WASHINGTON — When Vanessa Willock wanted an Albuquerque photographer to shoot her same-sex commitment ceremony in 2006, she contacted Elane Photography. The response came as a shock: Co-owner Elaine Huguenin said she only worked "traditional weddings." "Are you saying that your company does not offer your photography services to same-sex couples?" Willock asked by e-mail. "Yes, you are correct in saying we do not photograph same-sex weddings," Huguenin responded. Now 7 1/2 years after that e-mail exchange, the Supreme Court is considering whether to referee the dispute. The photography case is viewed through the lens of same-sex marriage, but it also pits two constitutional rights against each other: freedom of speech and equal protection. Willock and her partner, Misti Collinsworth, had no trouble finding another photographer for their September 2007 ceremony. Still, Willock filed a complaint against Elane Photography with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, charging that the snub violated the state's anti-discrimination law. Twenty other states have similar laws. The commission and state courts agreed, ruling that the photo studio cannot discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. "They may ... post a disclaimer on their website or in their studio advertising that they oppose same-sex marriage," the state Supreme Court wrote, "but that they comply with applicable anti-discrimination laws." In asking the nation's highest court to hear the case, Huguenin and her husband, Jonathan, dropped their religious freedom claim and are focusing solely on free speech — in this case, the freedom not to photograph same-sex ceremonies. to read more: usatoday.com