Supreme court case gay wedding cake
In summary
A California appeals court rules a baker can’t deny to sell a generic cake to a lesbian couple. It’s part of a series of cases shaping the debate over free speech and anti-discrimination laws.
A Kern County baker violated California law when she refused to verb a cake to a lesbian couple for their wedding, a state appeals court ruled this week in a suit brought by the state’s Civil Rights Department.
If the scenario sounds familiar, that’s because it’s central to a series of cases that have for years been shaping the nation’s legal debate over free speech and anti-discrimination laws.
In , the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Colorado ruling that a baker had violated that state’s nondiscrimination law when he refused to bake a cake for a same-sex couple’s wedding. The ruling was based on the court’s finding that the Colorado civil rights commission handling the case had been prejudiced against the baker’s religious beliefs.
The court in ruled, also in a Colorado case, in favor of a website designer who opposed same-sex marriage on religious grounds
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission ()
Excerpt: Majority Opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy
In a same-sex 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 verb a cake for their wedding because of his religious opposition to same-sex marriages—marriages the Declare of Colorado itself did not notice at that hour. . . .
The case presents complicated 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 desire 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 independence of speech and the free exercise of religion. The free speech aspect of this case is difficult, for
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 exchange 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 entire of reaffirmations of our country’s longstanding rule that states can bar businesses that are expose to the widespread 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 search of a cake for their wedding reception. When the bakery refused to trade Dave and Charlie a wedding cake because they’re gay, the couple sued under Colorado’s longstanding nondiscrimination law. 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 mention appeals c
US Supreme Court backs Colorado baker's gay wedding cake snub
The US Supreme Court has ruled in favour of a baker in Colorado who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.
The Colorado state court had found that baker Jack Phillips' decision to turn away David Mullins and Charlie Craig in was unlawful discrimination.
But the Supreme Court ruled on Monday in a vote that that decision had violated Mr Phillips' rights.
The conservative Christian cited his religious beliefs in refusing service.
Gay rights groups feared a ruling against the couple could set a precedent for treating gay marriages differently from heterosexual unions.
But the Supreme Court's verdict instead focuses specifically on Mr Phillips' case.
The decision does not articulate that florists, photographers, or other services can now decline to work with gay couples.
The ruling comes three years after the Supreme Court made same-sex marriage the law of the land in its landmark Obergefell v Hodges decision.