Loading...
Loading...
Click here if you don’t see subscription options
Associated PressJune 04, 2018
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.

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
5 years 11 months 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
5 years 11 months 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
5 years 11 months ago

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

Henry George
5 years 11 months 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
5 years 11 months 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?)

The latest from america

A Homily for the Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity, by Father Terrance Klein
Terrance KleinMay 22, 2024
Eddie Redmayne as the Emcee in ‘Cabaret’ at the Kit Kat Club at the August Wilson Theatre (photo: Marc Brenner)
The complicity of ordinary Germans in the Holocaust is the central subject of two shows now running in New York City.
Rob Weinert-KendtMay 22, 2024
At center: Republican U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson sits beside Democratic President Joe Biden during the annual National Prayer Breakfast at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Feb. 1, 2024. (OSV News photo/Evelyn Hockstein, Reuters)
Your enemies are children of God—and that includes the presidential candidate you can’t stand and his supporters.
“Brothers and sisters, humility is everything. It is what saves us from the Evil One,” Pope Francis said at today’s general audience, concluding his cycle of catechesis on virtue.
Pope FrancisMay 22, 2024