Washington, D.C., USA: The Supreme Court has upheld a Colorado baker’s right not to bake a cake for a same-sex couple, overturning a lower court’s decision. In a case brought by a Colorado baker – Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cake – the court ruled by a 7-2 vote that he did not get a fair hearing on his complaint because the Colorado Civil Rights Commission demonstrated a hostility to religion in its treatment of his case.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. The court’s four most conservative justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, concurred with the decision offering different rationales for the future.
The decision was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was seen as the swing vote. Justice Anthony Kennedy said that while it is unexceptional that Colorado law “can protect gay persons in acquiring products and services on the same terms and conditions that are offered to other members of the public, the law must be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion.”
Justice Kennedy pointed to the Colorado commission’s decision allowing a different baker to refuse to put an anti-gay message on a cake. Kennedy said that in this case the Colorado baker, Jack Phillips, understandably had difficulty in knowing where to draw the line because the state law at the time afforded store keepers some latitude to decline creating specific messages they considered offensive.
“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. Phillips was entitled to a neutral decision maker who would give full and fair consideration to his religious objection as he sought to assert it in all of the circumstances in which this case was presented, considered, and decided.” Kennedy wrote
Kennedy said that decisions on specific cases in the future may well be different.
“The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances must await further elaboration in the courts, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue respect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market,” Kennedy said.
For a half-century, the high court has upheld public accommodations laws against challenges brought by people who claim that their sincerely held beliefs — religious and otherwise — prevent them from serving customers on an equal basis.
This case began when Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins were organizing their wedding reception in Lakewood, Colorado., and were referred by their wedding planner to the Masterpiece Cakeshop.
When Mullins, along with Craig and his mother, arrived at the shop, bakery owner Jack Phillips informed them that he did not make cakes for same-sex weddings.
Phillips believes that same-sex marriages are sinful, that marriage is to be between a man and a woman. “I don’t believe that Jesus would have made a cake if he had been a baker,” he told reporters. “I’m not judging these two gay men,” he continued, “I’m just trying to preserve my right as an artist to decide which artistic endeavors I’m going to do and which ones I’m not.”
That, however, was not how Charlie Craig felt. “Man, it was just really humiliating,” Craig says, noting that he was particularly embarrassed for this to have happened in front of his mother.
As the couple would soon learn, Colorado, like most states, has a state anti-discrimination law for businesses that are open to the public. Colorado bars discrimination based on race, religion, gender and sexual orientation. So Mullins and Craig filed a complaint with the state commission on civil rights, which ruled in their favor, as did the state supreme court.
The baker, Jack Phillips then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Ruling In 16-111 Masterpiece cakeshop, ltd., et al. V. Colorado civil rights commission et al.