56 page United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision focuses on New York State's public accommodations laws which guarantee equal access to goods and services for members of protected classes

Below is the court's introduction to its decision in:

EMILEE CARPENTER, LLC, DBA EMILEE CARPENTER PHOTOGRAPHY, EMILEE CARPENTER, 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v. 

LETITIA JAMES, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW YORK, 

MARIA L. IMPERIAL, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE ACTING COMMISSIONER OF THE NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS,

 WEEDON WETMORE, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF CHEMUNG COUNTY, 

Defendants-Appellees.* 

 August Term 2022 

Argued: September 28, 2022 Decided: July 12, 2024 

No. 22-75 

"Plaintiff Emilee Carpenter is a wedding photographer who offers her services to the general public. Her complaint alleges that she wishes to create photography that reflects her religious and personal beliefs about marriage, including by declining to offer her services for same-sex weddings. She brought this preenforcement action alleging that New York’s public accommodations laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 

"Carpenter sought declaratory and injunctive relief, and requested a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the laws.

"The United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Geraci, J.) dismissed all of her claims. 

"Following the Supreme Court’s decision in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 600 U.S. 570 (2023), State and County Defendants concede and we agree that Carpenter has met her burden at the pleading stage to state a plausible free speech claim. However, we reject Carpenter’s request to enter a preliminary injunction at this stage.

"We also affirm the district court’s dismissal of Carpenter’s other claims. Carpenter has failed to sufficiently plead that the public accommodations laws violate her right to free association, her right to free exercise of religion, or the Establishment Clause. She has also failed to state a plausible claim that the laws are unconstitutionally overbroad or vague.

"Accordingly, we AFFIRM in part, REVERSE in part, VACATE in part, and REMAND for further proceedings."

* The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to amend the captions.

Click HERE to access the complete 56 page opinion by the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals.