Counsel for Colorado web designer hits back against claim same-sex marriage request was faked

The Christian web designer who won a Supreme Court case asserting she did not need to design websites for same-sex marriages hit back against claims that she fabricated a request to design a website for such a union on Monday.

A June 29 article in The New Republic suggested that Lorie Smith and the Alliance Defending Freedom had fabricated the request, saying "it looks like Smith and her attorneys have, perhaps unwittingly, invented a gay couple in need of a wedding website in a case in which they argue that same-sex marriages are 'false.'"

Legacy media outlets ran with the story, propelling it to headline status across the nation. ADF and Smith, however, contend it is simply not true.

"This desperate attempt to malign ADF, our client, and a critical ruling affirming all Americans’ free speech blatantly distorts the facts of the case and the nature of pre-enforcement lawsuits," said ADF President Kristen Waggoner. "To say that Lorie Smith or ADF fabricated a request for a same-sex wedding website is a lie. It would make no sense to have fabricated a request because one wasn’t required for the court to decide her case."

"To pretend that a request that nowhere featured in the Supreme Court’s decision was at 'the heart' of the case demonstrates an ignorance regarding the legal principles involved," she continued. "And it’s telling that many who push this false narrative can’t bring themselves to consider the more likely scenario that ‘Stewart’ or another activist did in fact submit the request."

Waggoner noted that Smith's case was a pre-enforcement challenge, meaning she had filed it seeking a preemptive declaration that she didn't have to design same-sex marriage websites before the issue came up in the course of doing business.

She further noted that neither the appeals court nor the Supreme Court justices' opinions made any mention of such a request. Waggoner noted that Smith received the request referenced in the article after filing her suit and has received other requests while the case was pending.

Attracting her particular ire, however, was a public statement from Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser that appeared in The Hill after the decision.

"Our position in this case has been there is no website development happening, there is no business operating. This was a made-up case without the benefit of any real facts or customers," he is quoted as saying. Waggoner contends such a statement directly contradicts the state's own admissions during the case.

Waggoner concluded by celebrating the court decision as a win for creative liberty and free speech before deriding the narrative that they had fabricated a request. 

"Everyone, including those who identify as LGBT, should be thrilled that the Supreme Court upheld free speech in 303 Creative," she said. "This manufactured sideshow is a frantic attempt to delegitimize a historic Supreme Court decision, a client whom Colorado censored for seven years, and a court that upheld a foundational American principle."

"For those who aren’t happy with it, they should criticize the ruling based on its substance rather than perpetuating falsehoods about the case," she concluded.

Ben Whedon is an editor and reporter for Just the News. Follow him on Twitter.