If ‘Stewart’ was not a real customer, does it affect Supreme Court ruling on wedding website?

The revelation has raised questions about how Lorie Smith’s case was allowed to proceed all the way to the nation’s highest court with such an apparent misrepresentation and whether the state of Colorado, which lost the case, has any legal recourse.

Smith’s lawyers maintained that she didn’t have to be punished for violating the law before challenging it. In a February 2017 filing, they revealed that though she did not need a request to pursue the case, she had, in fact, received one. An appendix to the filing included a website request form submitted by Stewart on Sept. 21, 2016, a few days after the lawsuit was filed. It also included a Feb. 1, 2017 affidavit from Smith stating that Stewart’s request had been received.

Lawyers for Colorado wrote in their brief to the Supreme Court in August that it did not amount to an actual request for a website and the company did not take any steps to verify that a “genuine prospective customer submitted the form.” It’s not clear whether the state took any steps to verify whether Stewart — whose contact information was included in court papers — was a real potential customer.

“If there are other places where you can get standing, then legally speaking I don’t think it actually does make a difference,” said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School. Kristen Waggoner — the president of Alliance Defending Freedom, who argued the case before the high court— has said her client doesn’t have a way of doing background checks on those requesting business nor is it her responsibility to do so. On Monday, Waggoner slammed suggestions that her client made up the request, adding that “the more likely scenario” is that “‘Stewart’ or another activist did in fact submit the request.

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

AOC urges Dems to try to rein in Supreme CourtRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday excoriated the US Supreme Court for “overreach and abuse of power” after a series of conservative-leaning decisions and urged Democrats to ratche…
Source: nypost - 🏆 91. / 67 Read more »

Letters to the Editor — Affirmative action, Supreme Court, public service, giant batteriesRe: “Affirmative action struck down — Colleges can no longer consider race for admissions, justices rule,” Friday news story. Everyone knows about Brown vs....
Source: dallasnews - 🏆 18. / 71 Read more »

Most Americans approve Supreme Court striking down affirmative action: pollThe majority of Americans say they agree with the Supreme Court's decision to roll back affirmative action and restrict the use of race as a factor in college admissions.
Source: WashTimes - 🏆 235. / 63 Read more »

Ohio’s Congressional Redistricting Case Moves Back to State Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court made the order in light of its decision in Moore v Harper
Source: ClevelandScene - 🏆 383. / 55 Read more »

After student loan decision, AOC says the Supreme Court is on 'a dangerous creep towards authoritarianism'Ocasio-Cortez said the court's recent rulings — striking down race-based admissions and Biden's student loan forgiveness plan — 'signal a dangerous creep towards authoritarianism and centralization of power.' AOC accuses SCOTUS of 'dangerous' power grab:
Source: YahooNews - 🏆 380. / 59 Read more »

Charles Barkley amends will to donate millions to Auburn following Supreme Court's affirmative action rulingFollowing the Supreme Court's ruling to outlaw affirmative action in college admissions, NBA legend Charles Barkley amended his will to leave money to his alma mater.
Source: FoxNews - 🏆 9. / 87 Read more »