The United States Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a Colorado baker would refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, citing religious objections. Although the ruling is in favor of the baker, the Court did not decide on the overlying issue in the case: whether or not a business can invoke religious objections to refuse service to gay and lesbian individuals.
In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the Court voted 7-2 with a limited ruling that the commission violated the First Amendment Rights of Jack Phillips, the baker, after anti-religious bias was cited.
In 2012, Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins, a same-sex couple, visited Phillips’ cakeshop in Denver to purchase a cake for their wedding. However, Phillips told them he would not make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, stating that it was against his religious beliefs.
Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal in Colorado, thus the commission stated the refusal violated the law. The Colorado Supreme Court upheld that reasoning, with parties for Phillips appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.
When the Supreme Court heard arguments in December, it was clear that the candor of the commission played a significant role in the ruling. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the swing voter on the bench, was bothered by the comments of a member of the commission during the hearing. The commissioner seemed, “neither tolerant nor respectful of Mr. Phillips’ religious beliefs,” Kennedy said.
“The commission’s hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion,” he wrote.
In a report from Yahoo News, Kennedy said in his majority opinion that, “the larger issue ‘must await further elaboration’ in the courts.” He was referencing that appeals in similar cases are on the docket, including one surrounding a florist that did not want to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding.
Barronelle Stutzman, a florist in Richland, Washington, has appealed a state Supreme Court ruling that found she violated state law for refusing to provide flowers for the wedding of two men. She claimed doing so would violate her religious beliefs, but the court held that her floral arrangements do not constitute protected free speech, and that providing flowers to a same-sex wedding would not serve as an endorsement of same-sex marriage.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which represented the same-sex couple in its legal fight, said on Monday that it was pleased the Supreme Court did not endorse a “broad religion-based exemption from anti-discrimination laws.”
Nevertheless, Phillips’ legal representation in front of the Court praised the ruling.
“Government hostility toward people of faith has no place in our society, yet the state of Colorado was openly antagonistic toward Jack’s religious beliefs about marriage. The court was right to condemn that,” said Kristen Waggoner, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, who argued the case.
When asked about the current business practices of her client, Waggoner said the baker is willing to sell to, “anyone who enters his store.” Though, “he simply declines to express messages or celebrate events that violate his deeply held beliefs,” Waggoner added.
