Civil rights must be protected

As a person of faith, it is important to me that our state enforce our anti-discrimination laws fairly and with respect for the sincerely held religious beliefs of all Washingtonians.

That is what my office has done in our civil rights case involving Arlene’s Flowers and its owner, Barronelle Stutzman. Last year, the Washington Supreme Court unanimously agreed that Arlene’s violated Washington’s law against discrimination by refusing to serve gay and lesbian customers for their weddings in the same way the business served heterosexual customers.

Before this case began, my office wrote a letter asking that Mrs. Stutzman “not discriminate against consumers based on their sexual orientation in the future.” The letter made clear that if she agreed to comply with the law going forward, she would not have to admit wrongdoing or pay any penalties. She simply had to follow the law.

She declined.

After we won our case, my office asked the court for $1 for all our costs, plus a $2,000 penalty. The court ordered Arlene’s Flowers to pay the State a $1,000 penalty plus the $1 we requested. The state is seeking nothing further.

Because they keep losing with their legal arguments, Arlene’s lawyers are now pushing a false narrative that the case is just like the Masterpiece Cakeshop case recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. Not true.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled for the bakery owner, because the Colorado Civil Rights Commission demonstrated “impermissible hostility” toward the owner. There is no such hostility in Washington’s handling of the Arlene’s Flowers case.

Mrs. Stutzman’s attorneys cite an incident at a Seattle coffee shop as proof that I am treating her unfairly. The owner asked a group of anti-abortion activists to leave his business because of offensive leaflets they distributed. But the owner never said he was refusing to serve Christian customers, and he even said publicly that he would serve the same activists again if they returned.

By contrast, Arlene’s Flowers refused to ever serve gay and lesbian customers for their weddings.

As the United States Supreme Court has long recognized, religious freedom is not the freedom to discriminate against others in the name of religion. All of us should be able to eat in a restaurant, rent an apartment, or buy flowers regardless of how, or whether, we choose to worship. If I go to a restaurant with my young twins to celebrate their First Communion, I should not have to worry about whether the restaurant will refuse to serve me because we are Catholic.

Our state law not only protects our right to be served regardless of our religion, but also our race, our gender, whether we have a disability, our status as a veteran, or whether we are gay or lesbian. Arlene’s Flowers refused to serve Mr. Freed and Mr. Ingersoll because they are gay. As Attorney General, I will not stand by and allow that to happen.