Gay cake shop
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission ()
Excerpt: Majority Opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy
In a queer couple visited Masterpiece Cakeshop, a bakery in Colorado, to make inquiries about ordering a cake for their wedding reception. The shop’s owner told the couple that he would not make a cake for their wedding because of his religious opposition to queer marriages—marriages the Articulate of Colorado itself did not distinguish at that occasion. . . .
The case presents tough questions as to the proper reconciliation of at least two principles. The first is the authority of a State and its governmental entities to protect the rights and dignity of gay persons who are, or aspire to be, married but who confront discrimination when they seek goods or services. The second is the right of all persons to exercise fundamental freedoms under the First Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment.
The freedoms asserted here are both the release of speech and the free apply of religion. The free speech aspect of this case is difficult, for
'Gay cake' row: What is the dispute about?
In October , the owners of the bakery lost their appeal against the decision that their refusal to make a "gay cake" was discriminatory.
Appeal court judges said that, under rule, the bakers were not allowed to provide a service only to people who agreed with their religious beliefs, external.
Reacting to the ruling, Daniel McArthur from Ashers said he was "extremely disappointed" adding that it undermined "democratic freedom, religious freedom and free speech".
The firm then took the case to the Supreme Court and they won.
The UK's uppermost court ruled the bakery's refusal to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage was not discriminatory.
Then president of the Supreme Court, Lady Hale, ruled the bakers did not refuse to fulfil the order because of the customer's sexual orientation.
"They would have refused to make such a cake for any customer, irrespective of their sexual orientation," she said.
"Their objection was to the word on the cake, not to
Baker&#;s refusal to bake lgbtq+ wedding cake
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, U.S. ___; S. Ct. ()
Summary
In a choice, the US Supreme Court overturned a decision of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission (Commission) that a baker could not decline to sell a wedding cake to a homosexual couple. Jack Phillips, owner of Colorado bakery, Masterpiece Cakeshop, had refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple because same-sex marriage conflicted with his religious views. The couple filed a complaint with the Commission on the basis that the refusal violated declare anti-discrimination laws that prohibit businesses from discriminating against customers based on sexual orientation. The Commission ordered the baker to bake the cake. The baker appealed to the Court of Appeals which agreed with the Commission. The baker appealed to the US Supreme Court (Court), which overturned the Commission&#;s decision on the basis that the Commission had not acted with the required neutrality towards religion.
The Court did not take the opportunity to decide o
In Masterpiece, the Bakery Wins the Battle but Loses the War
In the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled for a bakery that had refused to trade a wedding cake to a same-sex couple. It did so on grounds that are specific to this particular case and will have little to no applicability to future cases. The opinion is full of reaffirmations of our country’s longstanding governance that states can bar businesses that are open to the public from turning customers away because of who they are.
The case involves Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig, a same-sex couple who went to the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Denver in hunt of a cake for their wedding reception. When the bakery refused to sell Dave and Charlie a wedding cake because they’re gay, the couple sued under Colorado’s longstanding nondiscrimination commandment. The bakery claimed that the Constitution’s protections of free speech and freedom of religion gave it the right to discriminate and to override the state’s civil rights law. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled against the bakery, and a articulate appeals c