Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Masterpiece Cakeshop Tag

The second attempt by the State of Colorado to punish Jack Phillips and his Masterpiece Cakeshop has come to an end, once again, with a victory for the baker. Round 1 was the baker's refusal to create a custom cake for a same-sex marriage, on the ground that it violated the baker's Christian faith to create a message celebrating same-sex marriage.

When Masterpiece Cakeshop won its case on June 4, 2018, in the U.S. Supreme Court over refusal to bake a cake celebrating a gay wedding, many people assumed it was a win for religious freedom and free speech (the right not to have government compel your speech). The cake shop did not refuse to sell cakes to gays, it simply didn't want to prepare a custom cake with a specific message on it which it believed was contrary to the owner's religious beliefs. But as we covered at the time, the Supreme Court decision was tailored to bias against the cake shop in the Colorado administrative process. Justice Kennedy authored the 7-2 opinion:

I have to admit, I fell asleep at the baker's wheel. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission was argued to the Supreme Court earlier this month and I, didn't cover it. Not out of lack of interest, but more feeling like we're chasing a swarm of daily dust ups created by (1) Trump Derangement Syndrome in all its many and varied forms, (2) Trump on Twitter, (3) media reacting to Trump on Twitter, (4) Alabama, (5) War on Women and #MeTwo, (6) Men at Work, (7) the End of the World. Plus, it was end of the semester, and things were busy. Excuses, I've had a few.

The Supreme Court has decided to hear a challenge from a Colorado baker, after the state charged him with violating the state's anti-discrimination law when he declined to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. From the LA Times:
Jack Phillips, the owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colo., was charged with violating the state’s anti-discrimination law, which says businesses open to the public may not deny service to customers based on their race, religion, sex or sexual orientation. The state commission held that his refusal to make the wedding cake amounted to discriminatory conduct, and the state courts upheld that decision.
Font Resize
Contrast Mode