Ottawa Impact founder filed papers in same-sex Supreme Court case

OTTAWA COUNTY — A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision finding a Christian graphic artist from Colorado doesn't have to design wedding websites for same-sex couples received support from an Ottawa County far-right fundamentalist group, the founder of which filed an amicus brief.

"Today the Supreme Court delivered a resounding victory for free speech and freedom of conscience with the decision in 303 Creative v. Elenis," Ottawa County Board of Commissioners Chair Joe Moss retweeted from Ottawa Impact, a group he created in 2021. "The Court affirmed all Americans’ First Amendment rights to be free of government coercion when they speak and express themselves."

Moss has never responded to The Sentinel's requests for comment.

Moss filed an amicus brief that, while not directly supportive of graphic artist Lorie Smith, argued that "designers of custom websites and graphics are engaged in an expressive art and are entitled to the same protections under the First Amendment as artists using any other medium."

"Sadly, Democrat-controlled governments in states like Colorado and Michigan have adopted a controlling, Marxist ideology, culminating in court cases like 303 Creative and Rouch World," Moss retweeted from Ottawa Impact. "This Leftist ideology results in harsh, punitive treatment of those who disagree."

Moss, a 38-year-old Hudsonville businessman, owns and operates several web-hosting companies. Moss personally listed himself as "Joe Moss, Michigan" in his amicus brief, a type of petition accepted by courts from individuals or groups not directly involved in a legal case, but with expertise or insight to offer.

Moss' longtime business partner, 37-year-old Joel Kallman, as well as the software company they created together, Jenison-based Eclarian LLC, also signed onto the amici brief. They comprised three of the 17 signatories on the document, which was filed in May 2022 — three months prior to Moss being elected to the Ottawa County commission.

"Free speech is for everyone," he tweeted on June 26. "This case is about First Amendment freedoms that apply to every American."

Moss said he was "proud to stand with Lorie Smith." He went on to thank the Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented Smith, and everyone who contributed.

After being sworn into office at the Ottawa County Board's inaugural meeting, Moss and his fellow Ottawa Impact co-founder and self-described "parents' rights advocate" Sylvia Rhodea, made a series of controversial changes affecting the way local government operates.

Those changes included:

• Firing the county administrator and hiring former unsuccessful Republican congressional candidate John Gibbs

• Eliminating the county’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Office and firing its staff

• Putting forward its preferred choice of health officer, Nathaniel Kelly, a health and safety manager at a Grand Rapids-area HVAC company with no previous work history in public health

• Firing its longtime corporate legal counsel Doug Van Essen and hiring Kallman Legal Group, which has familial ties to Moss’ business partner, Joel Kallman

• Changing the county’s inclusive motto of “Where You Belong” to “Where Freedom Rings"

Subsequent discussions and decisions have seen a heavy focus on the LGBTQ+ community and what government departments should and shouldn't do when providing their constituents services.

In November, Moss and Rhodea crafted a 14-page manifesto titled “The Sexualization of Michigan Children in Public Schools." In it, they make the argument that “the sexualization of Michigan’s children and the push to eliminate parents from education and medical decisions … has occurred under the strategic influence of activists within Michigan government and special interest groups.”

In May, Moss refused to approve long-promised grant funds to LGBTQ nonprofit Out On The Lakeshore, as well as a nonprofit with a Black doula program for pregnant women. He initially signed the required paperwork "vi coactus," meaning "compelled by force," one week prior to the deadline for the funds to be disbursed. (He signed the documents with his legal name three days later.)

Most recently, Moss and Rhodea championed a county resolution that prohibits staff and resources from being used for "activities, programs, events, contents or institutions which support, normalize, or encourage the sexualization of youth," which was approved June 27.

The resolution was viewed as an attempt to prevent county services from being allocated to the LGBTQ community, according to the Health Officer Adeline Hambley.

Hambley is embroiled in an ongoing lawsuit against the board, claiming Moss, Rhodea and several other Ottawa Impact-linked commissioners have repeatedly interfered with her ability to perform her job responsibilities, which she claims is a violation of state statute. The board attempted to replace Hambley with Kelly during its inaugural meeting.

"Our staff have never provided services that sexualize or abuse children," Hambley wrote in a prepared statement June 28. "The health officer has explicit legal authority and responsibilities under the Michigan Public Health Code to prevent disease, prolong life, and promote public health for everyone. These laws exist to ensure local public health is nonpartisan and acts without moral judgment in the duty to protect health."

During a report from Hambley before the Health and Human Services Committee on June 20, several OI commissioners questioned the department’s involvement in Pride Month events in Grand Haven and Holland, with Rhodea going so far as to say the event was “grooming children,” a term used to refer to lowering a child's inhibitions with the goal to sexually abuse them.

Allison Miedema, also an OI commissioner, said that by merely "being in attendance, the (health department) is promoting sexual promiscuity," which could result in higher levels of sexually transmitted diseases.

Hambley has vowed to continue to perform her duties as she deems appropriate to serve public health.

"The Ottawa County Department of Public Health does not, and will not, discriminate against any group of people," she wrote. "We will continue to do our jobs to the best of our abilities within the framework of the laws of Ottawa County and the State of Michigan."

More: 'Compelled by force': County leader signals disdain for marginalized community programs

More: Does OI's newest resolution lay a 'trap' for health department staff?

The recent Supreme Court decision was celebrated in conservative circles while simultaneously viewed as a setback for LGBTQ rights by progressives.

But in the days since the 6-3 ruling — with the six current conservative justices in the majority — questions have surfaced about whether the case in Littleton, Colorado, was bolstered by fabricated information.

Smith filed her case in 2016, arguing the state’s anti-discrimination law prevented her from including a message on the webpage for her company, 303 Creative, that she wouldn't create wedding websites for gay couples, The Washington Post reported.

Smith claimed to have received a request for a website for a man's upcoming same-sex wedding — but the man who allegedly made the request has now told several media outlets he's happily married to his wife of 15 years and had no idea the Supreme Court case named him as a related party.

The request in dispute, from a person identified as “Stewart,” wasn’t the basis for the federal lawsuit filed preemptively seven years ago by Smith, before she started making wedding websites at all. But as the case advanced, it was referenced by her attorneys when lawyers for the state of Colorado pressed Smith on whether she had sufficient grounds to sue.

On Friday, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat, called the lawsuit a “made up case” because Smith wasn’t offering wedding website services when the suit was filed.

Weiser didn’t know the specifics of Stewart’s denial, but said the nation’s high court shouldn't have addressed the lawsuit’s merits “without any basis in reality.”

Lawyers for the state previously argued Smith hadn't been harmed by the law, and moved to dismiss the case.

Her lawyers maintained Smith didn't have to be punished for violating the law before challenging it. In February 2017, they said, even though she didn't need a request in order to pursue the case, she'd received one.

Subscribe: Get all your breaking news and unlimited access to our local coverage

“Any claim that Lorie will never receive a request to create a custom website celebrating a same-sex ceremony is no longer legitimate because Lorie has received such a request,” they said.

Smith’s Supreme Court filings briefly mentioned she received at least one request to create a website celebrating the wedding of a same-sex couple. There didn't appear to be any reference to the issue in the court’s decision.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the opinion for the majority.

"Laws along these lines have done much to secure the civil rights of all Americans," Gorsuch wrote. "But in this particular case, Colorado does not just seek to ensure the sale of goods or services on equal terms. It seeks to use its law to compel an individual to create speech she does not believe."

— Sarah Leach is executive editor of The Holland Sentinel. Contact her at sarah.leach@hollandsentinel.com. Follow her on Twitter@SentinelLeach.

This article originally appeared on The Holland Sentinel: Ottawa Impact founder filed papers in same-sex Supreme Court case