Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
Showing Original Post only (View all)U.S. Supreme Court Throws Out Gay-Bias Finding Against Baker [View all]
Source: Bloomberg
The U.S. Supreme Court threw out a finding that a Colorado baker illegally discriminated when he refused to make a cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding, Bloomberg News reports.
A seven-justice majority said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission finding was tainted by animus toward religion. The Supreme Court ruling was a narrow one that didn't reach the broad free-speech and religious-rights issues that had prompted the justices to take up the case.
Developing...
Read more: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-04/u-s-supreme-court-throws-out-gay-bias-finding-against-baker?utm_medium=social&utm_content=business&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic
Supreme Court rules narrowly for baker who refused to create same-sex couple's wedding cake
WASHINGTON -- A divided Supreme Court on Monday absolved a Colorado baker of discrimination for refusing to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
The verdict criticized the state's treatment of Jack Phillips' religious objections to gay marriage, ruling that a civil rights commission was biased against him. As a result, the decision did not resolve whether other opponents of same-sex marriage, such as florists and photographers, can refuse commercial wedding services to gay couples.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the court's 7-2 decision against the same-sex couple, departing from his long history of opinions in favor of gay rights dating back a generation. Included among them was the court's 2015 decision legalizing gay marriage nationwide.
During oral argument in December, Kennedy and other conservative justices had expressed concern about the potential effect on other merchants with strong religious objections to same-sex marriage, from chefs to florists.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/04/supreme-court-rules-against-gay-wedding-exemptions/1052989001/
WASHINGTON -- A divided Supreme Court on Monday absolved a Colorado baker of discrimination for refusing to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
The verdict criticized the state's treatment of Jack Phillips' religious objections to gay marriage, ruling that a civil rights commission was biased against him. As a result, the decision did not resolve whether other opponents of same-sex marriage, such as florists and photographers, can refuse commercial wedding services to gay couples.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the court's 7-2 decision against the same-sex couple, departing from his long history of opinions in favor of gay rights dating back a generation. Included among them was the court's 2015 decision legalizing gay marriage nationwide.
During oral argument in December, Kennedy and other conservative justices had expressed concern about the potential effect on other merchants with strong religious objections to same-sex marriage, from chefs to florists.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/04/supreme-court-rules-against-gay-wedding-exemptions/1052989001/
84 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Also, the grounds were narrow, so there is little precedent that will flow from this decision. . .nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Jun 2018
#18
The case was decided narrowly on "bias" by the state commissioner. As the article states the
Fred Sanders
Jun 2018
#14
Going to have to disagree with you regarding bakers and cake decorators, at least.
Jedi Guy
Jun 2018
#59
Bakers and decorators are artist and do express. But a fancy shape or curlicue has nothing to do
Bernardo de La Paz
Jun 2018
#72
I never said baking cakes is not an art. Or decorating them. You miss the essential point.
Bernardo de La Paz
Jun 2018
#76
You may well obtain relief in that precedent could make you be safe from consequences of a refusing
24601
Jun 2018
#63
They want the just opposite of today's result. They wanted a sweeping ruling addressing
24601
Jun 2018
#71
Agree with others that the court did not address anyone's refusal to do business with another.
24601
Jun 2018
#65
Avoided the meat...good way to summarize it...or kicked the can down the road, also. No Panic!
Fred Sanders
Jun 2018
#15
I refuse to do business with MAGAts, Christian conservatives, and Fox News fans.
Initech
Jun 2018
#12
IMO it now means my apartment building can refuse rental to all christians or anyone else they
RKP5637
Jun 2018
#16
No. Even a wider ruling (that was not made) would not apply to apartment buildings.
Bernardo de La Paz
Jun 2018
#22
If it is a tiered cake, no problem. Figurines no excuse, if customer specifies it. Read my post.
Bernardo de La Paz
Jun 2018
#54
It's not just creativity. That's no excuse. It has to involve expression related to religion etc.
Bernardo de La Paz
Jun 2018
#78
We serve people and service cars. Customers & clients are people, not machinery. . . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Jun 2018
#55
We were waiting on this for a while. Will we hear about their gerrymandering decisions
Tiggeroshii
Jun 2018
#29
So wasn't it the civil rights commission's JOB to show "animus" to discrimination?
SunSeeker
Jun 2018
#37
Baking a cake is not speech. It is a good. It is not akin to a mural signed by an artist.
SunSeeker
Jun 2018
#47
I'm not arguing the morality of not selling to a buyer because of their sexual orientation.
Jedi Guy
Jun 2018
#67
I did read what you wrote. It just is wrong. Being artistic does not exempt you from the law.
SunSeeker
Jun 2018
#69