U.S. Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Anti-Gay Baker
The Supreme Court has reached a verdict concerning the Colorado baker who refused to make a same-sex wedding cake. Turns out, they sided with the baker.
The Supreme Court has announced that they ruled in favor of the Colorado baker who refused service in the name of religious objections.
The ruling resulted in a 6-2 count in favor of the baker. The two votes against the Colorado baker were Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was viewed as the swing vote in the case, wrote the opinion.
As the Associated Press reports:
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a Lakewood baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple because of religious beliefs did not violate Colorado’s anti-discrimination law. The case pitted Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, and the couple, Charlie Craig and David Mullins. The court ruled that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s actions violated the free exercise clause. In arguments before the court in December, Justine Anthony Kennedy, the author of all the court’s major gay-rights cases, worried that a ruling in favor of Phillips might allow shop owners to put up signs saying “We do not bake cakes for gay weddings.”
More: Trump’s New CDC Director Has a Shameful History on HIV/AIDS
This case began when Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins were organizing a wedding reception for themselves. In order to prepare for that, they contacted wedding cake company Masterpiece Cakeshop.
Jake Phillips, the owner of the business, was at first glad to work with Craig who had first arrive there with just his mother. When Phillips found out that the cake would be used for a gay wedding, he immediately rejected serving them. “Not a cake that I can make,” he said.
“I don't believe that Jesus would have made a cake if he had been a baker,” he said on ABC's The View. “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.”
This led Craig and Mullins to take Phillips to court. The case then continued in different courts for half a century until officially reaching the Supreme Court and their recent decision.
LAMBDA, the largest legal organization for LGBTQ rights, has commented on the Supreme Court ruling on Twitter.
#BREAKING: #SCOTUS has issued its decision in #MasterpieceCakeshop. Our attorneys are reading it now. More info & analysis soon. #LGBTQ https://t.co/yCdR4UWZ5l
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018
This 7-2 ruling, while limited, invites discrimination and further efforts to justify withholding service from #LGBTQ people. This will encourage all sorts of mischief by well-funded anti-#LGBTQ organizations who want to create exceptions to nondiscrimination laws.
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018
We’re going to see years of needless, hurtful litigation by those seeking to evade responsibility for discriminating against members of our community.
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018
The Court today has turned its back on longstanding precedent and offered not just encouragement but a roadmap to those who would deny civil rights to #LGBTQ people and people living with #HIV. #MasterpieceCakeshop
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018
Religious freedom under our Constitution has always meant the right to believe whatever you wish. NOT to act on your beliefs in ways that harm others. #LGBTQ #SCOTUS #MasterpieceCakeshop #OpenToAll
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018
#SCOTUS has become an accomplice in the right's strategy to hollow out one of its finest achievements, the right to equal marriage, and create what Justice Ginsberg memorably termed "skim milk marriages." #LGBTQ #MasterpieceCakeshop #OpenToAll
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018
BUT! We (Lambda Legal, our partners, & countless others) are ready to fight back & make sure this heartbreaking & infuriating decision is understood for what it is: a narrow ruling limited to unique facts that cannot be used to justify discrimination in any other context. #LGBTQ
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018
We will continue to fight in every arena and in every court until #LGBTQ people and people living with #HIV have full equality under the law in every aspect of our lives. We deserve no less. #SCOTUS #MasterpieceCakeshop #OpenToAll
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) June 4, 2018