The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding but refrained from deciding on the larger issue of whether a business owner can choose not to serve gay customers.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the court's opinion in the Masterpiece Cake shop case, finding that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated baker Jack Phillips' rights when it said he cannot refuse to bake cakes for same-sex couples. The justices voted 7-2 that the commission violated Phillips' First Amendment rights with its "clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection." That "hostility" casts doubt on the commission's impartiality in the case, the court said.
"Whatever the confluence of speech and free exercise principles might be in some cases, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's consideration of this case was inconsistent with the State's obligation of religious neutrality," Kennedy wrote.
The court did not decide the overarching issue of whether a business can refuse to serve gay people; Kennedy wrote the issue "must await further elaboration," while also stating that it's a "general rule" that religious objections don't allow business owners to deny equal access to protected classes of people "under a neutral and generally applicable public accommodations law."
In concurring, Kagan agreed with the court's narrow ruling, stating that "Colorado can treat a baker who discriminates based on sexual orientation differently from a baker who does not discriminate on that or any other prohibited ground. But only, as the Court rightly says, if the State's decisions are not infected by religious hostility or bias."
Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor dissented, saying that the attitudes and statements of commissioners shouldn't nullify previous rulings in the case, which were in accordance with Colorado law.
"Whatever one may think of the statements in historical context, I see no reason why the comments of one or two Commissioners should be taken to overcome Phillips' refusal to sell a wedding cake to Craig and Mullins," Ginsburg wrote. "The proceedings involved several layers of independent decisionmaking, of which the Commission was but one."
The case began back in 2012 when Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig went to Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood hoping to order a cake for their same-sex wedding.
Owner Jack Phillips refused, saying it violated his religious freedom and First Amendment rights.
On Dec. 5, the anniversary of Dave and Charlie's first date, their long legal battle reached the U.S. Supreme Court.
Phillips's lawyers argued this was not a case about refusing service, noting that Phillips would sell the couple anything in the shop, but that a custom order drew the line in the sand.
Alliance Defending Freedom, which led legal efforts on Phillips' behalf, praised the court's ruling in an emailed statement:
"Jack serves all customers; he simply declines to express messages or celebrate events that violate his deeply held beliefs. Creative professionals who serve all people should be free to create art consistent with their convictions without the threat of government punishment. 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. Tolerance and respect for good-faith differences of opinion are essential in a society like ours. This decision makes clear that the government must respect Jack's beliefs about marriage."
In a conference call following the ruling, Mullins and Craig expressed disappointment in the court's opinion.
"Obviously we are disappointed with this ruling but we want to thank the state of Colorado," they said. "It makes us feel the state we call home has had our backs."
The American Civil Liberties Union, which represented Mullins and Craig, recognized that the court was addressing the commission's handling of the case and not the larger issue at hand.
"The court reversed the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision based on concerns unique to the case but reaffirmed its longstanding rule that states can prevent the harms of discrimination in the marketplace, including against LGBT people." said ACLU Deputy Legal Director Louise Melling.
- Supreme Court rules in favor of Colorado baker who refused to make same-sex wedding cake
- Supreme Court rules for Colorado baker in same-sex wedding cake case
- Judge rules California baker doesn't have to make wedding cake for same-sex couple
- Bakery allowed to refuse cake for gay wedding
- Supreme Court considering taking same-sex wedding flowers case
- Gay wedding cake ruling reaffirms that businesses can't discriminate
- The Arizona Supreme Court ruled two business owners did not have to make invitations for a same-sex wedding
- URGENT - Supreme Court won't take up case of florist who refused service for same-sex couple
- URGENT - Supreme Court rules on travel ban
- Supreme Court rules against mystery company