This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The attorney general for the state of Arizona, Democrat Kris Mayes, says she'll still enforce a so-called "non-discrimination" law in her state, even though the Supreme Court has struck down as unconstitutional a nearly identical demand in the state of Colorado.

A report from the Post Millennial called the announcement by Mayes "an act of defiance against the Supreme Court's decision to protect religious liberty."

In the decision, the justices, 6-3, said the state of Colorado was not allowed under the Constitution to require a web designer to use a state-approved ideology when talking about marriage.

Lorie Smith wanted to, with her 303 Creative, promote traditional marriage. But as a Christian, she could not provide that same promotion to same-sex duos.

The high court slammed Colorado for its ideology, and it wasn't the first time that state was brought low by a Supreme Court loss. Several years ago the justices scolded Colorado for its official "hostility" to Christianity in its attempt to force baker Jack Phillips to create promotions for same-sex duos with his cake artistry. Actually, several other cases remain in the pipeline over Colorado's discriminatory actions against Christians.

According to the report, Mayes claimed her office still will seek to prosecute those businesses that refuse to serve "those that belong to a 'protected class.'"

She lashed out at what she called the "profoundly wrong" decision, and said it amounted to nothing less than discrimination against "LGTQ+ Americans."

She did not address the constitutional protection for religious rights around which the case revolved.

"While my office is still reviewing the decision to determine its effects, I agree with Justice Sotomayor — the idea that the Constitution gives businesses the right to discriminate is 'profoundly wrong.'"

Sotomayor dissented from the majority in the case.

And, the report said, Mayes issued a statement encouraging people to file complaints if they think they've been the target of discrimination based on "race, color, religion, or sex."

She said her state does not allow any discrimination "in public places."

"If any Arizonan believes that they have been the victim of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), national origin, or ancestry in a place of public accommodation, they should file a complaint with my office. I will continue to enforce Arizona’s public accommodation law to its fullest extent," she said.

The Supreme Court found that Colorado was seeking "to use its law to compel an individual to create speech she does not believe. As surely as Ms. Smith seeks to engage in protected First Amendment speech, Colorado seeks to compel speech Ms. Smith does not wish to provide."

A lower court earlier found Colorado was using its state power to suppress opinions that it did not like.