A Traverse City, Mich., salon owner has banned customers who identify as anything other than a man or a woman from her business, drawing widespread condemnation.
“If a human identifies as anything other than a man/woman, please seek services at a local pet groomer,” Christine Geiger wrote disparagingly on a since-deleted Facebook page. “You are not welcome at this salon. Period.”
“This is America; free speech. This small business has the right to refuse services,” she added.
Geiger, who owns Studio 8 Hair Lab, appeared to be responding to a Michigan house bill that would expand the state’s hate-crime law to include harassment or intimidation on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. Republican critics of the bill have argued that it could criminalize the refusal to use preferred pronouns, though supporters, including some Republicans, dispute that interpretation. “We’re talking about intimidating, threatening violence,” said Republican representative Graham Filler to the Detroit News.
The salon owner expanded on her comments in a subsequent post on a local community Facebook page, writing that while she has no issues with gay people, she does not support the “TQ+” community.
“This stance was taken to insure that clients have the best experience, and I am admitting that since I am not willing to play the pronoun game or cater to requests outside of what I perceive as normal,” Geiger wrote.
Geiger’s comments, first reported by the Kansas City Star, were condemned by a spokesman for Michigan attorney general Dana Nessel. “The Attorney General finds the comments to be hateful, reprehensible remarks,” the spokesman told the Independent, adding that Geiger is likely to face legal consequences.
Nathan Triplett, president of the Michigan ACLU, explained on Twitter that Geiger is in violation of the state’s Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act, which was recently amended to also prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
Triplett added that 303 Creative v. Elenis does not apply in this case. The Supreme Court ruled in late June that a website designer cannot be forced to design a page for a same-sex couple. However, Justice Neil Gorsuch clarified that that case involves a state attempting to compel speech for a business owner who provides expressive services. According to Gorsuch, speakers do not shed their First Amendment protections by employing the corporate form to disseminate their speech.
However, Geiger’s post indicated she desired a blanket ban for the individuals mentioned with respect to her salon-related services.
The Michigan attorney general’s office concurred that the Supreme Court’s decision does not allow blanket discrimination.