Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al
What's at Stake
After the Washington Supreme Court found that the refusal of Arlene’s Flowers to sell flowers to a gay couple violated Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act, the flower shop sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States. The US Supreme Court subsequently remanded to the WA Supreme Court and on June 6, 2019, the WA Supreme Court affirmed their earlier decision. On September 11, 2019, Arlene’s Flowers filed to hear the case again, at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Curt Freed, a faculty member at Columbia Basin College, and Robert Ingersoll, a manager at Goodwill, have been a couple for almost nine years. They are engaged and are planning a wedding for September 2013. Having purchased goods from Arlene’s Flowers on many occasions, Ingersoll approached the florist on March 1 to arrange for flowers for the event. However, he was told that the business would not sell the couple flowers because of the owner’s religious beliefs.
The Washington Law Against Discrimination prohibits discrimination because of sexual orientation. It bars businesses from refusing to sell goods, merchandise, and services to any person because of their sexual orientation. The courts have found that businesses open to the general public may not violate anti-discrimination laws, even on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs.
Filed in Benton County Superior Court, the lawsuit is seeking a court order barring the florist from discriminating against customers on the basis of sexual orientation and damages for the violation of the couple’s rights.
Update: The United States Supreme Court denied Arlene’s Flowers’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari on July 2, 2021.
Joint Stipulation to Dismiss
Petition for Rehearing
Petitioner's Supplemental Authority Letter
Reply Brief of Petitioners
Brief in Opposition to Cert for the State of Washington
Brief in Opposition to Cert for Rob Ingersoll and Curt Freed
Amicus Briefs in Support of Petitioner
- Amicus Brief for The Cato Institute et al.
- Amicus Brief of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
- Amicus Brief for Center for Religious Expression
- Amicus Brief for Concerned Women of America et al.
- Amicus Brief for The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention et al.
- Amicus Brief for First Amendment Scholars
- Amicus Brief for Foundation for Moral Law
- Amicus Brief for Members of Congress
- Amicus Brief for Samaritans Purse and The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association
- Amicus Brief for the State of Arkansas
Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Opinion on Remand
Amicus Briefs in Support of Plaintiffs-Respondents
State Respondent's Opening Brief
Respondent's Opening Brief
Appellant's Opening Brief
Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers - Order
Amicus Briefs in Support of Respondents
- Washington Businesses
- Professor Tobias B. Wolff
- Washington Employment Lawyers Association
- Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
- NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
- National Center for Lesbian Rights, et al.
- Washington State Association for Justice
- Lambda Legal Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., et al.
- Anti-Defamation League and 26 Other Organizations
- Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Amicus Briefs in Support of Appellants
- Christian Legal Society, et al.
- National Religious Organizations
- The Frederick Douglas Foundation, et al.
- Adam J. MacLeod
- Legal Scholars in Support of Equality and Religious and Expressive Freedom
- The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
- International Christian Photographers
- The Cato Institute
- Protecting Constitutional Freedoms, Inc.
- Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention
Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers - Reply Brief of Appellants
Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers - Attorney General Response
Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers - Brief of Respondents Ingersoll and Freed
Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers - Brief of Appellants