opinion | The Supreme Court opened the door to discrimination at 303 Creative. Here’s how countries can shut down.

In a short time, Ms. Davis’ refusal to issue a marriage license forced her to jail. However, she and Kentucky State eventually reached a reasonable middle ground. While Miss Davis refused individual same-sex marriage license, others in her office did the same at her place. In return, state lawmakers in Kentucky enacted legislation, signed by the governor, a Republican, that remove the names of county clerks from the wedding license.

The result is a win-win: No gay or lesbian couple is denied equal treatment, and no salesperson who holds an ethical objection to same-sex marriage needs to issue a license in person. sign marriage. By amending anti-discrimination laws, states could reach a similar compromise for religious business owners and the gay and lesbian customers they serve.

Some might argue that simply asking a business owner like Ms. Smith to entrust the design of a gay couple to another employee or contractor would still be a First Amendment violation. But even Mrs. Smith refuted that unbelievable claim: Mrs admit, to her credit, that she would be happy to recommend gay and lesbian couples with another designer. The debate that is also a loser in the freedom exercise has been resolved precedentassumes that a proxy option is allowed as long as it is applied neutrally, regardless of the beliefs of any business owner.

Given the state of our politics, there is a growing tendency to view major Supreme Court cases as win-win battles. And today, it seems that the people who are the target of social discrimination are often the ones who end up with Nothing.

However, that is only true if we let the conservative majority of the courts rule us without objection. The Supreme Court decisions are not necessarily the final chapter in our story. People often retain powerful ways to protect themselves through common sense law-making. Just last year, for example, Maine enacted a significant amendment to its own anti-discrimination law. prevent the worst consequences about a major Supreme Court decision that threatens the wall between church and state.

So as the Supreme Court staggered more and more out of touch with America’s core values, legislators around the country must continue to act to circumvent the courts in ways permitted by law. They can start by reaching a reasonable, precedent-based compromise between the freedom of expression of people of faith and the right of gay and lesbian Americans to be equal before the law.

Aaron Sugar (@AaronTangLaw) is a professor of law at the University of California, Davis and a former law clerk to Justice Sonia Sotomayor. He is the author of upcoming book “Supreme arrogance: How overconfidence is ruining the courts — and how we can fix it.”