A federal judge has blocked the state of New York from forcing a Christian photographer to work same-sex weddings, which goes against her religious beliefs.
US District Judge Frank P. Geraci Jr. of the District Court for the Western District of New York granted Emilee Carpenter, the photographer, a preliminary injunction shielding her from being compelled to violate her religious beliefs.
Carpenter owns and operates a wedding photography business in New York. Attorney General Letitia James’s office took action to compel her to service same-sex weddings, which prompted Carpenter to file the lawsuit.
The court based its ruling on the Supreme Court decision in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, which held that the state of Colorado couldn’t force a website designer to create content for same-sex weddings. The district court earlier had ruled against Carpenter before the Supreme Court’s ruling.
However, now the court has recognized that the higher court’s ruling took precedence. It recognized that Carpenter “believes that opposite-sex marriage is a gift from God” and that she used her services “to celebrate such marriages.” Using her work to “celebrate or promote” same-sex unions
“More broadly, the Supreme Court held that a state public accommodation law may violate a business owner’s free-speech rights under the First Amendment to the extent it ‘compel[s] an individual to create speech she does not believe,’” the district court noted.
Judge Geraci noted that New York’s public accommodation law forced Carpenter to perform services that should would not normally perform. The judge found that the photographer “demonstrated the sincerity of her opposition to same-sex marriage” and noted that the law would force her to violate her religious beliefs.
Geraci looked at whether Carpenter’s craft constituted expression that the First Amendment protects. He ruled unequivocally that it does. He noted that her work is not just a service, but an expressive product designed to evoke emotions. In other words, she creates works of art that the Constitution protects. He further acknowledged that Carpenter “makes a variety of creative choices relating to, among other things, the exposure, composition, focus, and lighting of her photographs” and “exercises her creative judgment in editing and culling the photographs.”
I’m so thankful to get a big win yesterday for Emilee Carpenter.
— Kristen Waggoner (@KristenWaggoner) May 23, 2025
Under NY law, Emilee faced up to $100,000 in fines & a year in jail should she decline to create photos & blog posts that violate her faith. Now, NY may not enforce its unjust law against her as the case proceeds. pic.twitter.com/ysI2dX9Yil
The judge further rejected New York’s argument that her work did not have a specific message. “A narrow, succinctly articulable message is not a condition of constitutional protection, which if confined to expressions conveying a particularized message, would never reach the unquestionably shielded painting of Jackson Pollock,” he wrote.
He noted that “The First Amendment protects ‘purely artistic as well as political expression’--that is, ‘art for art’s sake.’”
If the judge had not issued this ruling, Carpenter faced up to $100,000 in fines and a year in jail for not violating her religious convictions.
Of course, the case is not over. The injunction is temporary pending the outcome of the overall lawsuit. But hopefully, the Supreme Court’s ruling will stop New York’s efforts to compel Carpenter and others to cater to progressive ideology on sexuality and gender.
What is interesting about this case is that it is not the result of an LGBTQ couple that filed a complaint similar to how activists targeted a Colorado Christian baker. The state took it upon itself to target Carpenter. This is a prime example of the state strong-arming people into going against their religious beliefs — and hopefully the court will eventually rule in favor of religious freedom.