The Supreme Court announced Monday that it will not take up a dispute involving a small New Mexico wedding-photography firm that refused to provide services for a same-sex commitment ceremony. 
 
 The justices indicated in a routine order list that they would not hear the closely watched case, Elane Photography v. Willock. As usual, they did not offer any explanation for declining to consider the case. 
 
 Elane Photography’s owner, Elaine Huguenin, said her religious beliefs led her to decline to photograph same-sex weddings. However, after a lesbian couple complained about her refusing the work, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled last year that the move amounted to illegal discrimination. 
 
 (PHOTOS: Where same-sex couples can wed) 
 
 Conservative and libertarian groups took up Huguenin’s cause, arguing that forcing her to photograph such an event violated her constitutional rights to free speech and freedom of religion. They argued that the law was akin to forcing an author or artist to focus on a subject matter he or she did not wish to address. 
 
 However, gay rights groups and other civil rights organizations said Huguenin was offering a commercial service like any other and could therefore be compelled to comply with anti-discrimination laws. 
 
 The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision not to consider the case sets no precedent. The New Mexico court’s ruling will remain binding in that state, but courts in other states are free to adopt it or disregard it. 
 
 Read more about: Civil Rights, Free Speech, First Amendment, Gay Rights, Religious Freedom, New Mexico 

 WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to century-old bans on campaign contributions by corporations. 
 
 The justices turned away an appeal without comment Monday from Iowa Right to Life, less than a week after they struck down overall limits in federal law on contributions from the wealthiest donors to candidates for president and Congress, as well as political parties. 
 
 Iowa Right to Life asked the court to hold that corporations have the same constitutional free speech rights as individuals to make campaign contributions.
– The Supreme Court quietly made a bunch of headlines today, mainly by rejecting potentially explosive cases. Here's a roundup of the day's (in)action: Gay rights: The court announced that it would not take up the highly charged case that began when a New Mexico wedding photographer refused to do the honors for a same-sex commitment ceremony, Politico reports. New Mexico's Supreme Court ruled that this amounted to illegal discrimination. That ruling will now stand in New Mexico, but only in New Mexico. NSA: The justices declined a conservative lawyer's unusual request that it bypass the usual appeals process and immediately take up a case arguing that the NSA's bulk collection of millions of Americans' telephone records violated the Constitution's ban on unreasonable search and seizure, the AP reports. A lower court had agreed with the lawyer that the program was "almost certainly" unconstitutional. Campaign finance: After last week's ruling, reform advocates are likely happy that the court decided not to take up a challenge to the 100-year-old rules banning direct contributions from corporations to candidates. Iowa Right to Life had asked the court to rule that corporations had the same free speech rights as individuals, the AP explains. As is customary, the Court offered no commentary on any of the decisions.