They allowed a company to discriminate against a gay customer for religious reasons, when they requested to make a website them. It’s important to note that the supposed customer never actually contacted the company, is not gay and had been married to a woman for about 20 years. So this was all based on a lie
The court opinion wasn’t based on any specific customer, if you read the SCOTUS opinion the website designer didn’t even have a business designing websites, they were just challenging the law in case they decided to make a business that did.
They allowed a company to discriminate against a gay customer for religious reasons, when they requested to make a website them. It’s important to note that the supposed customer never actually contacted the company, is not gay and had been married to a woman for about 20 years. So this was all based on a lie
The court opinion wasn’t based on any specific customer, if you read the SCOTUS opinion the website designer didn’t even have a business designing websites, they were just challenging the law in case they decided to make a business that did.
deleted by creator