First Amendment Protects Individuals’ Religious Beliefs

First Amendment Protects Individuals’ Religious Beliefs
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Code and Name
Professor’s Name
Date
First Amendment Protects Individuals’ Religious Beliefs
In 2016, Lorie Smith, the owner of 303 Creative, LLC (“303 Creative”), filed a lawsuit in which she sought an injunction to avoid the state from obliging her to create websites for marriages that defied her belief. 303 Creative offered couples with services of creating wedding websites, and Smith believes that marriage is a reserved union between one woman and one man. Despite Smith being willing to provide services for couples, she said that producing websites and custom graphics for marriages outside her definition contradicts the biblical truth. Smith made it clear that her design services are “expressive.” As such, 303 Creative provided wedding websites that were expressive in nature since they were tailored via close collaboration with couples. Smith promoted and celebrated her perception of what a marriage should entail since the websites she created were original artwork. Notably, the Supreme Court concluded the case fairly by ruling in favor of Smith and 303 Creative, since the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) was found to violate the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
The freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment of the US constitution. In particular, individuals are given the right to express themselves, assemble, petition, and worship in any religion they want. Congress is prohibited from promoting a specific religion over others and cannot restrict people’s religious practices (Collins & Hudson, 2021). In addition, it cannot prevent individuals or deny the press from speaking freely. However, CADA is another Colorado regulation that protects individuals from harassment and discrimination based on their religion, race, culture, sexual orientation, and ethnicity among other numerous differences. All businesses are required to observe CADA and violating this law has adverse repercussions, including cancellation of business licenses. In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023), there was a clash between the freedom of speech and CADA. From CADA’s perspective, 303 Creative was required to offer services to all people in Colorado. If Smith included services for creating wedding websites for couples, her definition of what constitutes a marriage would not have hindered her from offering similar services to gay couples. In contrast, by considering the free speech clause, Smith's belief that marriage is formed by one woman and one man makes a significant difference and can override CADA, as it will be seen throughout 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023).
Smith said that she was willing to collaborate or work with all individuals regardless of their classifications based on gender, race, disability, sexual orientation, and creed (Supreme Court of the United States, 2022). However, when it