In a narrow ruling Monday, the Supreme Court sided with the Colorado baker who refused to make a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
The court ruled in a 7-2 vote that the baker Jack Phillips didn’t receive a fair hearing and that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated the right to free exercise under first amendment of the Constitution, according to NPR.
Back in 2012, Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig walked into Masterpiece Cakeshop and asked him to bake a cake for their wedding reception, but Phillips said “I’m sorry, guys, I can’t do that.” Phillips said that he believed requiring him to bake cakes for same-sex weddings would force him to express a view that violated his religious beliefs.
The couple filed a formal complaint, and the Colorado courts ruled that based on the state’s public accommodation law Phillips refusal violated the law and clearly discriminated against the couple. According to NBC News, the public accommodation law bans discrimination by companies offering their services to the public.
No, the Supreme Court did not say LGBT discrimination was ok. The way to settle the still open question is simple. Here’s what we do: Dems win back Congress. We win the White House. We pass The Equality Act. We appoint judges who support it. So let’s make it happen. #SCOTUS pic.twitter.com/twkCHQ58x8
— Bryce Tache ?? (@brycetache) June 4, 2018
But the court didn’t address the larger question of whether business owners like Phillips could invoke religious objections in their decision to not serve someone in the LGBTQ community.
According to the Associated Press, Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the 2015 same-sex marriage decision and Mondays ruling, that the larger issue and similar cases await “further elaboration” in the courts.
“While it is unexceptional that Colorado law can protect gay persons in acquiring products and services on the same terms and conditions as are offered to other member of the public, the law must be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion,” Kennedy said.
The Hill reports that Kennedy said when the legislature finds a group is being discriminated against, states are within their power to enact anti-discrimination in public accommodation laws. But he found that the commission showed “clear and impermissible hostility” towards sincere religious beliefs.
Across the country, florists, bakers, photographers and others have claimed that being forced to provide wedding services to same-sex couples violated their rights. Currently, there are several appeals cases similar to this one that are still pending, including one in the Supreme Court from a florist who didn’t want to provide a same-sex couple with flowers for their wedding AP reports.
Support Kennedy’s decision came from across the political spectrum, including conservative Chief Justice John Roberts and liberal Elena Kagan.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and joined by Sonia Sotomayer dissented though, and Ginsberg wrote in a statement that: “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 continues that “what matters is that Phillips would not provide a good or service to a same-sex couple that he would provide to a heterosexual couple.”
According to the Washington Post, Craig and Mullins issued a statement following the decision: “Today’s decision means our fight against discrimination and unfair treatment will continue. We have always believed that in America, you should not be turned away from a business open to the public because of who you are. We brought this case because no one should have to face the shame, embarrassment, and humiliation of being told ‘we don’t serve your kind here’ that we faced, and we will continue fighting until no one does.”