A St. Cloud couple's legal effort to refuse to film same-sex weddings made its way before a federal appellate panel Tuesday, in a case seen as an important potential sequel to the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in favor of a Colorado baker who also refused to serve gay couples.
Carl and Angel Larsen, who run a Christian videography business called Telescope Media Group, sued Minnesota's human rights commissioner in December 2016 in federal court, saying the state's public accommodation law would hit them with steep fines and jail time if they began offering wedding videography services that only promoted their vision of marriage.
Chief U.S. District Judge John Tunheim dismissed their lawsuit in September 2017. In his ruling, he called the Larsens' plan to post a notice on their website that they would deny services to same-sex couples "conduct akin to a 'White Applicants Only' sign," and that it would be an act of discrimination not protected by the First Amendment.
With the backing of attorneys for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a national conservative Christian legal group, the Larsens appealed to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where an attorney for the couple and from the state Attorney General's Office argued before a three-judge panel and a crowd of onlookers that spilled into the hallway on Tuesday in St. Paul.
Speaking to reporters afterward outside the courthouse, Minnesota Human Rights Commissioner Kevin Lindsey said the state outlaws the act of denying services based on discrimination and not the content of Larsens' speech — an argument the state leaned on throughout Tuesday's hearing. Lindsey also linked the act of singling out same-sex couples for denial of service to the outlawing of interracial marriage decades ago.
"In this case we are talking about two individuals who love each other and may wish to get married, and if those individuals face the same type of discrimination that those interracial couples did in the 1950s or '60s, isn't that a compelling interest of the state?" Lindsey said. "For us it is truly about conduct. Everyone should have the right to be protected under the law when they buy goods and services."
Jeremy Tedesco, an attorney representing the Larsens, later called such a comparison "absurd" and pointed to a line in the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 decision recognizing same-sex marriage that said those with beliefs like the Larsens' arrived at that point "based on decent and honorable convictions."
A more recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple loomed large over Tuesday's arguments, with both sides using the decision to bolster their case. The three judges openly searched for any guidance that could be gleaned from the court's June majority opinion.