Federal Judge Blocks New York from Forcing Christian Photographer to Serve Same-Sex Weddings
A federal court has ruled in favor of a Christian wedding photographer in New York who challenged the state’s anti-discrimination law, which she claimed violated her religious convictions by forcing her to photograph same-sex weddings. U.S. District Judge Frank P. Geraci Jr. issued the decision Wednesday, delivering a critical victory for religious liberty advocates and small business owners concerned about government overreach.
Emilee Carpenter, a Christian photographer based in upstate New York, had filed a lawsuit arguing that the state’s Human Rights Law and Civil Rights Law compelled her to either violate her religious beliefs or face fines and legal penalties. These laws prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, effectively requiring Carpenter to photograph same-sex weddings if she offers services for heterosexual weddings.
Our Memorial Day Sale is STILL ON! Get 25% Off Sitewide with Discount Code: MEMORIAL25.
Includes FREE Shipping in the USA. https://GetZStack.Com
Judge Geraci ruled that these provisions could not be enforced against Carpenter in a way that infringes upon her First Amendment rights. “The state cannot force individuals to express messages that violate their deeply held religious beliefs,” he wrote. “Doing so is a form of compelled speech that the Constitution does not permit.”
This ruling affirms a long-standing American principle: individuals should not be compelled by the government to speak or act against their conscience. Carpenter had been facing fines of up to $100,000 and the potential loss of her business license for declining to provide services that conflict with her Christian beliefs about marriage.
According to her legal team at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), Carpenter serves all people, including LGBT individuals, but she cannot use her artistic expression to promote or celebrate messages that contradict her faith. “This case was never about discriminating against a person. It was about not being forced to violate my conscience or deny my beliefs,” Carpenter said after the ruling.
ADF legal counsel Jonathan Scruggs stated, “This decision is a win for everyone’s freedom of speech. The government should never force creative professionals to say things they don’t believe.”
The court’s opinion cited the 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that a Colorado website designer could not be forced to create websites for same-sex weddings. That decision set a major precedent for how lower courts interpret compelled speech in cases involving religious liberty and creative professionals.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat and vocal advocate of the state’s anti-discrimination laws, had argued that Carpenter was engaged in unlawful discrimination. However, the judge emphasized that the Constitution protects not only the rights of minorities but also the rights of individuals with traditional religious views.
This decision comes at a time when tensions are rising between religious freedom and LGBT rights across the United States. Critics of the court’s ruling argue it opens the door to broader exemptions from public accommodation laws. But supporters maintain that no American should be punished for peacefully living according to their faith.
Christian conservatives applauded the ruling as a necessary pushback against the overreach of progressive lawmakers who seek to erase deeply held biblical values from the public square. “This case was never about refusing service to anyone,” said a pastor from Albany who knows Carpenter. “It’s about standing firm in the truth of God’s Word and refusing to let the state redefine right and wrong.”
From a constitutional perspective, the case raises questions about the limits of state power when it intersects with free expression. By classifying artistic services as speech, the court reaffirmed the distinction between public accommodations like hotels or restaurants and expressive businesses like photography, writing, or design.
This clarification is vital for Christian business owners and professionals nationwide, who have increasingly found themselves in legal jeopardy simply for living out their faith in the marketplace. The ruling sends a message that the First Amendment does not yield to popular ideologies or government coercion.
Carpenter’s case is likely to set a standard for future challenges to laws that punish religious conviction under the guise of anti-discrimination enforcement. For now, she plans to continue her work as a photographer while remaining faithful to her values. “This isn’t just a win for me,” she said. “It’s a win for every American who values freedom of conscience and religious expression.”
As cultural pressures intensify, decisions like this underscore the importance of maintaining robust legal protections for religious Americans. Those who believe marriage is a sacred covenant between one man and one woman should not be bullied or bankrupted into silence by the state. Faith, after all, is not something Christians turn off during business hours—it’s a way of life.
With this landmark ruling, the judiciary has taken a step toward restoring balance and protecting the rights of citizens who seek to honor God in both word and deed. Whether or not higher courts weigh in, the precedent is clear: freedom of speech and freedom of religion remain foundational pillars of American liberty.