The Brief

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Friday that Colorado could not force website designer Lorie Smith to serve LGBTQ+ couples seeking wedding websites.

The ruling in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis has massive implications for LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination protections and other civil rights laws, as legal experts say those policies are now vulnerable to reinterpretation by courts.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court’s conservative majority, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting. The justices ruled that the First Amendment shielded business owners from speaking against their conscience. Smith claimed that it was a violation of her religious beliefs to make wedding websites for same-sex couples.

“Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance,” wrote Gorsuch.

In her dissent, Sotomayor called the majority’s interpretation of the First Amendment “profoundly wrong.”

“Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class,” Sotomayor wrote.

LGBTQ+ legal experts said the ruling does not grant businesses a widespread license to turn away LGBTQ+ couples. Instead, it creates a carve-out for business owners creating and selling art to reject specific commissions against their conscience.

Jenny Pizer, chief legal officer at Lambda Legal, the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ legal group, said that in this case, the court viewed Smith as a fine artist, similar to an oil painter. A sketch artist working at a popular pier likely would not be included in the carve-out.

LGBTQ+ advocates say the ruling, while limited, marks a significant loss of anti-discrimination protection and will invite further eroding of civil rights law.

“The litigant aiming to blow a big hole in civil rights law has prevailed, and she’s prevailed with a very narrow win, unlikely to have anything like the results that she was seeking,” Pizer said. “But nonetheless, this extreme reactionary court majority predictably is handing victory to the litigant who was seeking to damage civil rights laws to obtain a license to discriminate.”

David Johns, executive director of the LGBTQ+ advocacy group the National Black Justice Coalition, said in a statement Friday that the ruling greenlights religious discrimination.

“It is important to recognize that this decision not only affects the LGBTQ+ community but also has far-reaching implications for the broader civil rights of all marginalized communities that have dealt with our country’s long history of prejudice and inequity,” Johns said.

What was this case about?

Smith sued the state, claiming that its anti-discrimination act forces her to make art — in this case, wedding websites for queer couples — that is contrary to her religious beliefs. Smith wants to post a notice on the webpage of her business, 303 Creative, noting that she won’t design websites for same-sex marriages. She claimed it is her First Amendment right to turn same-sex couples away because she is making custom websites, and the government can’t force her what to say.

The Colorado Civil Rights Division argued that businesses serving the public can’t choose to deny service to a group of people who are part of a protected class, including LGBTQ+ couples, and that Smith needed to serve all customers, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Who is Elenis?

Unlike similar cases that predate this one, there wasn’t a same-sex couple suing the business for discrimination. Elenis in the case is Aubrey Elenis, director of the Colorado Civil Rights Division, who was sued in her professional capacity and listed first. Members of the civil rights commission were also named in the complaint, as was State Attorney General Phil Weiser. The commissioners are tasked with enforcing Colorado’s anti-discrimination act, which says that a person cannot be treated differently because of sexual orientation or gender identity.

The fact that there wasn’t a couple alleging discrimination is part of what made this case so unique. Instead, Smith sued because she wanted to advertise that she wouldn’t make wedding websites for same-sex couples. In some ways, that thrust the case into the realm of hypotheticals, since no one had been turned away from her business.

Who was really facing off here?

As with a lot of big cases, this was not just about a disagreement between a small website business in Colorado and the state. Smith was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a far-right legal organization that has brought similar cases. Some advocates, including the Southern Poverty Law Center, have designated ADF an extremist anti-LGBTQ+ hate group. Others who filed briefs in support of Smith include the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Association of Evangelicals.

Colorado was represented by Weiser. Others who have filed amicus briefs supporting the state commission include the American Bar Association, the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Didn’t the court already decide this five years ago in a case about cake?

In some ways. In 2018, the Supreme Court took up a similar case, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, and very narrowly ruled in favor of the baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to make a custom wedding cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins. Phillips was also represented by ADF.

In that case, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had ruled that Phillips violated the state’s anti-discrimination act by turning the gay couple away. Phillips’ lawyers argued that his religious beliefs and free speech rights shielded him from having to bake the cake. While the case could have had a profound and lasting impact on civil rights law, the Supreme Court declined to fully engage with larger legal questions. Instead, the court ruled that Colorado commissioners had displayed animus toward Phillips due to his religious beliefs. They ruled in Phillips’ favor but shied away from a sweeping ruling on religious beliefs or free speech rights that would have impacted other businesses in Colorado or beyond.

What is different now?

Ever since the Masterpiece case, courts have seen a number of cases that seek to revisit the enforceability of state and local anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people. Religiously affiliated anti-LGBTQ+ legal organizations have argued that officials can’t force business owners to endorse same-sex weddings against their faith. Some legal experts have expressed that Smith’s case was particularly tricky because her services include writing stories for each engaged couple, instead of just selling templates. Those stories, Smith and her attorneys say, are art.

What was the argument in favor of 303 Creative?

In arguing Smith’s case, the attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) claimed that if Smith was forced to provide wedding websites to same-sex couples, any working artist would lose the right to control their commissions. One example attorneys raised was a Democratic speechwriter being forced to write speeches for a Republican candidate. Attorneys said Smith would be happy to provide non-wedding websites to LGBTQ+ people, but she isn’t willing to create custom wedding narratives for same-sex couples who want to marry.

What was the argument against 303 Creative?

Lawyers for the state and LGBTQ+ legal organizations countered that under the criteria presented by Smith, it would’ve been nearly impossible to differentiate between what is art and what is a public accommodation or service. More than that, they added, political parties are not protected classes. Business owners can choose not to take commissions because they don’t agree with a political candidate.

“If somebody looks at a wedding website or receives a wedding invitation … whose information do they think it is?” asked Jenny Pizer, chief legal officer of Lambda Legal, the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ legal group. “Do they really think that it’s the information of the person who created the website or did the design? It’s a work for hire by people who have information to distribute.”

Why is this such a big deal?

Olivia Hunt, policy director for the National Center for Transgender Equality, said the ruling could impact protected groups for generations to come.

“It would potentially carve out a new and really dangerous loophole in civil rights protections, not just for LGBTQ people, but it could potentially create a precedent that would weaken civil rights protections for all people on any basis,” she said.

Facing growing public backlash and a pivot from his own past vetoes, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a sweeping package of seven bills on Monday that aim to force the data center industry to pay its own way in California.

Three of the new laws shift electric infrastructure costs away from residential customers and toward data center operators, three more mandate disclosures of water usage and other resources, and the last one makes data centers ineligible for environmental review exemptions.

Newsom, in a written statement, contrasted the new regulations with President Donald Trump’s hands-off approach to data centers and artificial intelligence.

“We know that we don’t have to sell out Californians or sacrifice our well-being to innovate and succeed,” the statement read. “California has proven that time and time again. With these laws, we are ensuring that Californians remain in the driver’s seat — and that those profiting from data centers aren’t doing so at our expense.”

Trump has aggressively pushed to accelerate data center development nationwide, arguing that they represent a significant economic opportunity for states that embrace them. He said last week at the All-In Summit, an invite-only conference for business leaders, that the industry is the “oil of the next 20, 25 years.”

Newsom’s signature on the new laws represents a significant departure from his actions on data centers last year, when he vetoed a water disclosure bill over concerns that regulation could stifle AI growth and signed into law only a single stripped-down environmental study bill.

Environmental advocates and the lawmakers behind this year’s bills previously told CalMatters that intensifying public backlash to data center construction propelled the legislation this year, despite a flood of lobbying funds from Big Tech and other business interests that aimed to soften the proposals.

“When you’re looking down the barrel of public outcry that says we don’t want [data centers] at all, and you’ve got localities that are saying they’re going to ban them, then you know the atmosphere has changed,” Assemblymember Diane Papan, a San Mateo Democrat who authored two of the bills which were signed into law on Monday, previously told CalMatters.

Other state legislatures as well as Congress are also advancing new measures to regulate the industry. In May, a Gallup poll found seven in 10 Americans oppose data center construction in their communities, while a July Public Policy Institute of California poll found similar opposition statewide. Hundreds of cities nationwide — including Monterey Park and Bay Area cities like Pittsburg — have either passed data center bans or walked back approvals following public outcry.

Arnab Pal, the executive director of Deploy Action, a nonprofit that promotes clean energy, told CalMatters the new laws are a good step toward preventing data centers from harming consumers through utility rate increases or environmental damage. Still, Pal said, more can be done to ensure such projects actually benefit everyday people through advancements to the electrical grid and the acceleration of clean energy infrastructure.

“I don't think these bills are the end of this fight; I think we're gonna have to do a lot of implementation on the back end and, as other states roll out their policies next year, I think California is going to look back and be like, ‘maybe we should have done more,’” Pal said. “I'm interested to see what we do next year on this.”

Business interests that oppose the measures, like the Data Center Coalition — which counts companies like Google, Microsoft and OpenAI among its members — warn that further regulation could push the data center industry out of California. According to the latest figures from the Data Center Coalition, the industry contributed 665,500 jobs, more than $159 billion in economic activity, and $14.1 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in California in 2024.

Khara Boender, the director of government affairs west for the Data Center Coalition, told CalMatters that “the data center industry shares the goal of ensuring growth of this critical infrastructure is responsible and well managed,” but more work needs to be done “to promote responsible data center growth while maintaining California as a key, competitive market in the global economy.”

Newsom signed the following bills:

• Senate Bill 1168, SB 886 and Assembly Bill 2383, which shift electric infrastructure costs away from residential customers and toward data center operators
• AB 2469, AB 1577 and AB 2619, which mandate disclosures or estimates of water usage and other resources
• SB 887, which makes data centers ineligible for blanket environmental review exemptions, and offers fast-tracked approval for facilities that meet state standards for water and energy conservation

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a pair of bills that will create a new system for approving community college bachelor’s degrees.

Senate Bill 960 and Assembly Bill 2694, which were sent to Newsom as a two-bill package, will let community college districts create between two and 12 new bachelor’s degrees to fill local workforce needs.

The bills take effect Jan. 1, 2028, and will create a five-tiered system determining how many bachelor’s degrees each district can offer. Districts will be placed into tiers based on the percentage of students who complete a degree or certificate or transfer to a four-year university. Districts with higher graduation and transfer rates will be allowed to create more bachelor’s degrees — up to the maximum of 12.

The tiered system, which was among several last-minute amendments to the legislation, has drawn backlash from community college presidents and chancellors, who say the system will pit colleges against one another.

However, the legislation does make at least one significant change supported by the community colleges: It only prohibits degrees that duplicate CSU programs offered in the same local service area as the community college proposing the degree. In the past, duplication wasn’t tied to location, and community colleges sometimes faced duplication objections from CSU campuses located in different regions of the state.

The legislation also allows for certain circumstances when community colleges can create bachelor’s degrees even if a nearby CSU campus has a similar program. That will be permitted if the CSU program has had a transfer acceptance rate of less than 75% for three consecutive years.

It’s back!

Pasadena Humane’s popular “poorly drawn pets” fundraiser is returning for another year, and the artists are already deep into drawing as of Monday.

Here’s how it works: you’ll be asked to make a donation through this Facebook post, comment on the post with a photo of your pet, and volunteers will respond in about a day with their best attempt at your four-legged friend. If you don’t have a Facebook account, you can also participate here via email.

“There’s just one tiny disclaimer: we’re much better at caring for animals than drawing them,” Pasadena Humane shared on social media. “Some of our artists are genuinely talented. Others… well, let’s just say your pet may come out looking artistically interpreted.”

Last year, officials said the fundraiser exceeded expectations, raising around $11,000 for the shelter from more than 450 submissions. Dogs and cats are most common, but people have also sent in photos of their birds, turtles, hamsters and horses in years past.

LAist takes you inside the artists’ studio at Pasadena Humane.

Both volunteers and staff signed up to draw the pets people are submitting - for good and for bad.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

The table was fully stocked with markers, colored pencils, pens and sharpies to choose from.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Meet the people behind the 'poorly drawn pets'

Volunteers and staff filed in and out of what’s been turned into the official drawing room Monday morning. Pens, colored pencils, markers and Sharpies were scattered all over the table in between pieces of paper and small printed photos of pets.

I asked Julie Nakahara, Pasadena Humane’s director of partnerships and events, how she would describe her artistic ability as she sketched out a lounging cat.

“That of a toddler,” Nakahara replied. “All right, maybe fourth grade.”

Her strategy was to outline the pet first in pencil before thickening the lines with a Sharpie, adding pops of color through the small details in the photo.

“[The cat’s] enjoying the sunshine, and so I tried to reflect it in my drawing,” she said. “Not sure if that's a true reflection, but I did the best I can.”

Julie Nakahara, Pasadena Humane’s director of partnerships and events, sketches out submission #49.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Robbin Huntingdale, a Pasadena resident and volunteer, had a colorful, Lisa Frank-style approach to her picture of two pups.

“I kind of felt like the more I add, the more interesting it'll be, and the less you'll notice that it doesn't look like the photo,” she said to a roar of laughter in the room.

But markers seemed to be a bold choice among the artists. As Mia Dunn, chief philanthropy officer, put it: “I'm a colored pencil girl, because they can be erased.”

Some of the portraits have been turned into tattoos in years past.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

The artists would often share their work with the room when they were done.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Some artists focused on nailing the vibe, while others narrowed in on the details.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Kevin McManus, PR and communications director, was trying to do justice to the two dogs he was drawing. He said he came up with a story as he sketched, describing one dog as the older brother and the other as its young punk with a look of “what did I do wrong?”

“It's a really fun way for us to raise money for the shelter,” McManus said. “Ultimately, that's what we're here for. To raise money for the pets in our care, for the programs that we do year-round.”

The fundraiser raises money to support the shelter's work and the animals in their care.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Volunteers and staff said it's a great way to give back to Pasadena Humane.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

This LAist reporter was also invited to get in on the artistic action.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

You have until 12 p.m. Wednesday to submit your pets for the fundraiser.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Cynthia remembers the sound of her 1-year-old daughter’s cries as she tried to desperately explain to a caseworker over the phone how the Lineage warehouse fire had affected her family financially. 

She had stopped working as a sidewalk vendor because of the unhealthy air, and her family was unsure how they would pay rent that month. 

“I felt like, I don’t know, I was going insane,” said Cynthia, who chose not to share her last name due to immigration concerns.

When the 32-year-old mother reached out to Lineage for assistance, she was told she didn’t qualify for relief, even though her East L.A. home was less than 1.5 miles away. The company said its relief was only intended “for those closest to the warehouse.” 

“We were close enough to receive the smoke and ash but not to receive aid,” she told Boyle Heights Beat. 

Cynthia is among many residents who say they were left out of assistance from Lineage because of where they live. Residents outside the established boundary say they breathed the same smoke, smelled the same stench and suffered through headaches, nausea and high utility bills as their neighbors who qualified for help.

Their question has been simple: If the air has no border, why did we? 

Cynthia holds her daughter while cooking next to her air purifier and air monitor.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

Who qualified for Lineage assistance?

Nearly 800 homes inside a designated area were eligible for assistance from Lineage during its recovery operations, according to the company. The support included free air purifiers, masks, air conditioners, temporary housing, grocery vouchers, utility assistance and cash assistance that were often delivered door-to-door by the company. 

Earlier this month, Lineage said it had provided support to 90% of the 797 households within the designated area and spent over $3.3 million on the recovery and relief effort. Lineage CEO Greg Lehmkuhl told Boyle Heights Beat that the company had made multiple attempts to reach the remaining households.  

“Our bilingual hotline remains open,” said Lehmkuhl. “We remain committed to supporting the community.”

Lineage first presented a map outlining the area closest to the warehouse as it announced a new wave of assistance at a community town hall on July 9. 

The map was later expanded to include all 797 homes and a larger part of East L.A. after L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis pushed for more support, according to her office. 

Now, the map covers households located between Union Pacific Avenue and the 5 Freeway, Los Palos Street and Herbert Avenue, all less than one mile from the Lineage warehouse. 

The map with the outlined resources was presented by Lineage at an AQMD hearing on Aug. 6.

(

Courtesy of Lineage

)

Why the boundary matters

The expanded map still left out residents like Cynthia, who lives with her husband and baby just one block north of the 5 Freeway. 

But it meant residents like Joaquin Angeles, who lives near Eastman Avenue Elementary School, would qualify. 

Angeles, however, said the support has been lackluster. 

“We haven’t been given what we really need,” Angeles said.

Angeles said his family received an air purifier with no filters and a faulty air conditioner that turns off after just five minutes. He has not yet received the $200 Southern California Edison credit Lineage promised. 

On Aug. 25, more than two months after the warehouse caught fire, his family was able to move into an Airbnb for nearly three weeks. While it allowed them a chance to finally breathe and not worry about what chemicals may be lingering in the air, the support came far too late, Angeles said. 

By then, his wife and son had already racked up medical bills of more than $1,300 each for emergency room visits for shortness of breath, respiratory infections and painful skin rashes. 

“We don’t have money to spare. We’re renting and living paycheck to paycheck,” Angeles said. “Aside from the illness itself, it’s a psychological blow. You feel discriminated against; you feel like they don’t care.”

Joaquin Angeles’s wife, Aurora , shows scarring from a rash on her arm after being exposed to smoke coming from the Lineage fire at her home in East Los Angeles.

(

Isaac Ceja

/

Boyle Heights Beat

)

Who created the boundary? 

It remains unclear who initially identified the 797 homes. 

Lineage said it did not create the map. A company spokesperson said the map originated with the Boyle Heights Unified Recovery Command, a centralized body made up of city departments established to coordinate updates during the remediation process. 

The command operates under the city’s Emergency Management Department and was created at the direction of L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ executive orders to speed up the Lineage cleanup and recovery. The Emergency Management Department did not respond to multiple inquiries about the map’s origin. 

Supervisor Solis’ office told The Beat it had no say in the original map but advocated for the area to be expanded. 

Navigating help hasn’t been easy

Residents outside the boundary have had to find alternative resources on their own. 

“The wind doesn’t have a boundary, why would you make a map?” Cynthia recalls asking herself as she navigated long lines at city and county resource centers.

City and county agencies initially offered temporary shelters, air purifiers and masks, and later added mobile health clinics, grocery gift cards and resource centers in Boyle Heights and East L.A. But residents also reported being turned away at distribution sites depending on whether they lived in Boyle Heights or unincorporated East L.A. 

A resident picks up air purifiers from a pop-up resource center in Boyle Heights on July 13, 2026.

(

Isaac Ceja

/

Boyle Heights Beat

)

Many often turned to nonprofit organizations already working in the community.

In her search, Cynthia managed to secure an air purifier from InnerCity Struggle, a $500 prepaid Visa card from El Centro de Ayuda and had her July rent covered by Proyecto Pastoral. She bought a $250 air conditioner to manage the unbearable summer heat and a $300 personal air monitor to track the air quality outside her home. 

Others haven’t been so lucky. 

Maria Duran, a Boyle Heights resident who lives outside Lineage’s assistance boundary, said she called 311 to receive an air purifier but was told they had run out. She later learned Proyecto Pastoral had stopped accepting applications for rent and utility assistance because of a waitlist of more than 1,500 people. 

“We are all being harmed. I feel frustrated. I feel down,” Duran said. 

Three months after the fire, Duran is struggling to pay a utility bill that nearly tripled over the summer. She continues to deal with stubborn eye irritation that has disrupted her daily life. 

Cynthia bought an air purifier following the Lineage fire.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

Nonprofits have been unable to keep up with the demand

Angela Gutierrez, a community organizing coordinator at Proyecto Pastoral, says the demand for relief reflects the scale of the disaster. 

Gutierrez lives about one mile from Lineage and said she was also frustrated that she didn’t qualify for assistance from the company. 

“To me, it was like we were abandoned because of our ZIP codes,” Gutierrez said. “But for Proyecto — for me — there is no ZIP code. To me, everyone is equal. The help is the same.”

Proyecto Pastoral received about 1,500 requests for assistance before closing its application in the wake of the fire. The organization helped cover rent and utility bills for residents living primarily within a 3-mile radius of Lineage, with emergency funds extending to families living as far as Monterey Park. Its fire relief funds were exhausted last week.

“It makes me sad and angry, because people were affected by the fire — and it wasn’t just in the immediate area,” Gutierrez said. 

Cynthia holds her daughter’s hand in her home.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

Is more help on its way?

Lineage said it remains committed to providing resources to the roughly 80 households that have not yet received assistance. 

“We’ve been working for weeks to make sure that we support everybody in this area that the county and city determined were impacted,” Lehmkuhl said. 

The company did not indicate whether it planned to expand its assistance boundary. 

District 14 Councilmember Ysabel Jurado is pushing for additional funding for the Lineage fire recovery. On Wednesday, the L.A. City Council approved a motion to explore creating a fund of up to $10 million to support the affected community. 

For residents like Cynthia, the need is urgent. She is already behind on rent and is using a credit card to pay for basic necessities.

In unincorporated East L.A., Angeles said more should be done to help the families affected. 

“It is not asking for a favor; it is simply asking for justice,” he said. 

Correction, Sep. 21, 2026 4:49 pm: This story was updated at 4:48 p.m. on Sept. 21, 2026, to clarify that Proyecto Pastoral received about 1,500 requests for fire assistance. An earlier version incorrectly stated that the organization had helped cover rent and utility bills to 1,500 people