Supreme Court sides with baker who wouldn’t make cake for a same-sex couple

Baker Jack Phillips decorates a cake in his Masterpiece Cakeshop Sept. 21 in Lakewood, Colo. The Supreme Court was set to hear oral arguments Dec. 5 in the case of the baker who cited religious freedom in his refusal to design a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. (CNS photo/Rick Wilking, Reuters)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is setting aside a Colorado court ruling against a baker who wouldn't make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. But the court is not deciding the big issue in the case, whether a business can refuse to serve gay and lesbian people.

The justices' limited ruling Monday turns on what the court described as anti-religious bias on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission when it ruled against baker Jack Phillips. The justices voted 7-2 that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated Phillips' rights under the First Amendment.

Advertisement

Justice Anthony Kennedy says in his majority opinion that the issue "must await further elaboration." Appeals in similar cases are pending, including one at the Supreme Court from a florist who didn't want to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
JR Cosgrove
2 years ago

But the court is not deciding the big issue in the case, whether a business can refuse to serve gay and lesbian people.

All those people refusing to serve people wearing a pro Trump hat or T shirt will be under scrutiny.

George Obregon
2 years ago

Speaking from the chair of natural law, there was no moral or legal reasons for the two Justices, Ginsberg and Sodameyer, to vote against the majority on the Supreme Court.
/geo ex cathedra

Ken Chang
2 years ago

The SCOTUS does not understand the 'accommodation' law, sexual orientations and homosexuality, period.

Henry George
2 years ago

Why anyone would want to force someone to have anything to
do with their "Wedding" when they don't believe that they can
be married - baffles me.

That one can live out what one's conscience dictates in a non-violent
way is the reason we have the First Amendment. Why can't younger folks see the wisdom in the most fundamental of our amendments ?

George Obregon
2 years ago

Indeed.
If you're selling services or custom goods where you would need to participate in activities you find objectionable on the grounds of Christian conscience, it is perfectly moral and legal to decline the job... (Of course you're risking all sorts of bad press, but did Christ ever preach that Christian conscience is popular?)

Advertisement

The latest from america

How can I pontificate about Christ’s presence with those who suffer and not put my body where Christ’s is?
Pope Francis: “The protection of the environment and respect for the biodiversity of the planet are issues that affect us all. We cannot pretend to be healthy in a world that is sick.”
Gerard O’ConnellJune 05, 2020
In a surprise appearance, Cardinal Peter Turkson, prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, said that racism destroys the brotherhood to which God calls all people.
Ryan Di CorpoJune 05, 2020
Meet the comedian who Father Richard Rohr called “the next Thomas Merton”
JesuiticalJune 05, 2020