Posted April 30, ,2026
Colorado keeps trying to protect people from bigotry, but the U.S. Supreme Court keeps making the world safer for bigots.
On April 20, the court agreed to hear a case in which two Catholic preschools in Colorado say they’re entitled to public money even though they discriminate against LGBTQ+ families. The court is many months away from deciding the case, but its record on related matters is a strong indicator that the conservative majority, which almost uniformly comprises Catholics, will rule in favor of religious belief and against families who are the target of hate.
The court established that record largely on the basis of cases out of Colorado. This is not completely an accident. Colorado in recent years has become a leader in enacting protections for all. But that makes the state fertile ground for religious extremists looking to plant their poisonous seeds, and the retrograde forces of Washington, particularly the reactionary Supreme Court, seem eager to help them cultivate a society that takes faith over facts and bigotry over diversity.
In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Lakewood baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to create a wedding cake for a gay couple on the ground that doing so would violate his religious beliefs. The case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, turned on the state’s application of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which prohibits anti-LGBTQ+ and other forms of discrimination in housing, employment, advertising and in places of public accommodation — such as a shop that sells wedding cakes.
A majority of justices said a state commission had exhibited hostility toward Phillips’ religious beliefs, and they gave such deference to his faith as to overwhelm the state’s legitimate interest in outlawing discrimination.
Then came the 2023 case of a Colorado website designer, Lorie Smith, who didn’t want to work for same-sex couples, because her religion teaches that marriage should only be between one man and one woman. She argued that her designs are a form of protected speech and that Colorado’s anti-discrimination law would compel her to express things she disagrees with.
The Supreme Court in siding with Smith in the case, 303 Creative v. Elenis, agreed that her websites were “expressive” and Colorado law would improperly force her to “defy her conscience” by treating gay people with equality.
Just last month, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kaley Chiles, a conservative Christian counselor from Colorado Springs who claimed a Colorado law that bans “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ minors violates her free speech rights. Conversion therapy, which tries to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, hurts kids, and it has been discredited by numerous medical associations. Colorado’s law applies only to licensed professionals. Does anyone think it would be OK for a therapist to advise a client to follow through on harmful thoughts? No. But when the harm is suffered by gay children, and the justification for abuse is some religious tenet, the Supreme Court is certain to choose spirits over living people.
All of these cases had implications far beyond Colorado. For example, more than 20 states in addition to Colorado protect children from conversion therapy.
A ruling in favor of the Catholic preschools could have similar reach. In that case, St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, the Archdiocese of Denver and two Catholic preschools say Colorado violated their religious rights when it denied their application for funds through the state’s universal preschool program. The denial was based on the preschools’ discrimination against LGBTQ+ families, since the program requires participating schools to serve children regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. The schools want taxpayers to subsidize their bigotry, and the court’s conservative majority shows every indication it’s all for it.
“This case may well be the fourth religious freedom loss in a row for Colorado — a record worse than any other state,” crowed a press release from Becket, a national public-interest law firm that’s working with the Catholic preschools.
Becket frames the case as a fight against religious discrimination. What it and the schools avoid spelling out is that they’re actually fighting for protections for bigotry. Few Americans would accept the claim “I have a right to hate,” but that changes dramatically when the words are preceded with “God says …,” which also appears to guarantee support from the current Supreme Court.
Roles are reversed. In 1992, Colorado became known as The Hate State after voters approved Amendment 2, which prohibited the state from adopting anti-discrimination protections for gay and lesbian Coloradans. Four years later, a very different Supreme Court correctly ruled the measure unconstitutional. The state has achieved admirable progress since then. Now it’s the justices who condone bigotry.
They’re earning their institution a reputation as a hate court.
Quentin Young is the editor of Colorado Newsline. This commentary is republished from Colorado Newsline under a Creative Commons license. Colorado Newsline is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.
