Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission

Case Summary and Outcome

• The US Supreme Court set aside an order from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
• The case involved a baker, Mr. Phillips, refusing to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple due to religious views.
• The Colorado Civil Rights Commission originally ruled that this refusal violated anti-discrimination law.
• The Supreme Court concluded the Commission acted with religious hostility, violating the First Amendment.

Facts

• Parties Involved:
  • Charlie Craig and David Mullins: Same-sex couple.
  • Jack Phillips: Baker, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop.
• Timeline:
  • 2012: Craig and Mullins approached Phillips for a wedding cake to celebrate their Massachusetts wedding in Colorado.
  • Phillips refused, citing religious objections to same-sex marriage.
• Legal Background:
  • Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) prohibits discrimination in places of public accommodation based on several grounds, including sexual orientation.
  • Administrative Law Judge ruled in favor of Craig and Mullins.
  • Colorado Civil Rights Commission affirmed this decision, ordering Phillips to stop discrimination and implement compliance measures.
  • The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld this ruling; the Colorado Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
  • The matter was taken to the US Supreme Court.

Decision Overview

• Supreme Court's View:
  • Justice Kennedy highlighted the need to balance non-discrimination principles with religious freedom.
  • The Court found the Commission's actions demonstrated religious hostility.
  • Key concern was the lack of neutrality in applying anti-discrimination law.
• Concurring Opinions:
  • Justice Kagan: Agreed with the majority on lack of neutrality but noted the Commission could distinguish Phillips's case from others based on message conveyed by cakes.
  • Justice Gorsuch: Emphasized that the same neutrality was not applied to similar cases involving secular objections.
  • Justice Thomas: Argued that creating a wedding cake was an expressive act protected by the First Amendment.
• Dissenting Opinion:
  • Justice Ginsburg: Argued that the Commission's decisions were not hostile to religion and that distinguishing between cases was justified based on the nature of the cakes' messages.

Decision Direction

• The decision has a mixed outcome, focusing on procedural fairness rather than addressing broader First Amendment implications involving compelled speech.

Global Perspective

• The decision reflects ongoing debates about balancing anti-discrimination laws and religious freedoms under national standards, with references to various related US cases.

Case Significance

• The case highlights the complexity of interpreting anti-discrimination laws relative to religious beliefs and freedom of expression.
• It sets a precedent for how neutrality must be maintained in legal proceedings concerning religious objections.

Official Documents

• Colorado Court of Appeals Decision
• Decision of the Administrative Law Judge
• Final Agency Order of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission
• Supreme Court Decision

Reports, Analysis, and News Articles

• Various media and legal analyses discuss the broader implications of this landmark case.

Note: Case analysis is derived from resources available through Columbia Global Freedom of Expression.