Supreme Court hands narrow win to baker over gay couple dispute




  • In US
  • 2018-06-04 15:05:14Z
  • By By Lawrence Hurley

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a victory on narrow grounds to a Colorado Christian baker who refused for religious reasons to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, stopping short of setting a major precedent allowing people to claim exemptions from anti-discrimination laws based on religious beliefs.

The justices, in a 7-2 decision, said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed an impermissible hostility toward religion when it found that baker Jack Phillips violated the state's anti-discrimination law by rebuffing gay couple David Mullins and Charlie Craig in 2012. The state law bars businesses from refusing service based on race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

The ruling concluded that the commission violated Phillips' religious rights under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.

But the court did not issue a definitive ruling on the circumstances under which people can seek exemptions from anti-discrimination laws based on their religious views. The decision also did not address several of the claims raised in the case, including whether baking a cake is a kind of expressive act protected by the Constitution's guarantee of free speech.

Two of the court's four liberals, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, joined the five conservative justices in the ruling authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy.

"The commission's hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment's guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion," Kennedy wrote.

"The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances must await further elaboration in the courts, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market," Kennedy said.

Of the 50 states, 21 including Colorado have anti-discrimination laws protecting gay people.

The closely watched case before the Supreme Court, which in 2015 legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, pitted gay rights against religious liberty. President Donald Trump's administration intervened in the case in support of Phillips.

The outcome of the case hinged on the actions of the Colorado commission. In one exchange at a 2014 hearing cited by Kennedy, former commissioner Diann Rice said that "freedom of religion, and religion, has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust."

'OPENLY ANTAGONISTIC'

Kennedy also noted that the commission had ruled the opposite way in three other cases brought against bakers in which the business owners had refused to bake cakes containing messages they disagreed with that demeaned gay people or same-sex marriage.

"Government hostility toward people of faith has no place in our society, yet the state of Colorado was openly antagonistic toward Jack's religious beliefs about marriage. The court was right to condemn that," said Kristen Waggoner, a lawyer at conservative Christian group Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Phillips.

She added that the decision "makes clear that the government must respect Jack's beliefs about marriage."

ACLU lawyer Louise Melling, who represents Mullins and Craig, said that high court had made it clear that businesses open to the public must serve everyone.

"The court reversed the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision based on concerns unique to the case but reaffirmed its longstanding rule that states can prevent the harms of discrimination in the marketplace, including against LGBT people," Melling added.

Phillips' lawyers argued that his cakes are an art form - a "temporary sculpture" - and being forced to create one to commemorate a gay wedding would violate his rights under the U.S. Constitution to freedom of speech and expression and free exercise of religion.

Mullins and Craig, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, said Phillips was using his Christian faith as pretext for unlawful discrimination based on sexual orientation. The ACLU said the baker was advocating for a "license to discriminate" that could have broad repercussions beyond gay rights.

The case became a cultural flashpoint in the United States, underscoring the tensions between gay rights proponents and conservative Christians.

The litigation, along with similar cases around the country, is part of a conservative Christian backlash to the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Phillips and others like him who believe that gay marriage is not consistent with their Christian beliefs, have said they should not be required to effectively endorse the practice.

Gay rights advocates said the case is just one part of a bigger struggle seeking greater legal protections for gay, bisexual and transgender people, including in the workplace, even as they fight efforts by conservatives to undermine gains secured in recent years.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham)

COMMENTS

More Related News

Engineering elections? U.S. top court examines electoral map manipulation
Engineering elections? U.S. top court examines electoral map manipulation
  • US
  • 2019-03-22 11:39:38Z

Thanks to partisan gerrymandering - a practice the Supreme Court will examine on Tuesday in two cases that could impact American politics for decades - that is no longer the case. A U.S. House of Representatives district that once covered heavily Democratic Greensboro was reconfigured in 2016, with the voters in the city of 290,000 people inserted into two other districts spanning rural areas with reliable Republican majorities. In adopting the electoral map, the legislature partitioned the campus of North Carolina A&T State University, the nation's largest historically black public college, into two separate districts.

Justice Thomas talks at court arguments, 1st time in 3 years
Justice Thomas talks at court arguments, 1st time in 3 years

The Supreme Court was about to adjourn for the day when the Georgia baritone politely inquired of the lawyer at the lectern. Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's only African-American member and lone Southerner, was breaking a three-year silence at high court arguments with a couple of questions

Trump gets a U.S. Supreme Court victory on immigration detention
Trump gets a U.S. Supreme Court victory on immigration detention
  • US
  • 2019-03-20 18:07:43Z

The Supreme Court on Tuesday endorsed the U.S. government's authority to detain immigrants awaiting deportation anytime - potentially even years - after they have completed prison terms for criminal convictions, handing President Donald Trump a victory as he pursues hardline immigration policies. The court ruled 5-4 along ideological lines, with its conservative justices in the majority and its liberal justices dissenting, that federal authorities could place such immigrants into indefinite detention anytime without the possibility of bail, not just immediately after they finish prison sentences. The ruling, authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, left open the possibility that...

Thomas speaks as U.S. high court weighs death row inmate
Thomas speaks as U.S. high court weighs death row inmate's race claim
  • US
  • 2019-03-20 15:28:03Z

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared likely to rule in favor of a black Mississippi death row inmate who has been put on trial six times for a 1996 quadruple murder and has accused the lead prosecutor of repeatedly removing black jurors to help secure a conviction. The argument in the case involving Curtis Flowers, 48, included the first questions asked from the bench by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's only black member, in three years. The Flowers case marked the latest dispute to reach the justices over allegations of racial bias in an American criminal justice system in which blacks and other minorities are disproportionately represented in prison populations.

The Latest: Justices seem troubled by Mississippi conviction
The Latest: Justices seem troubled by Mississippi conviction

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Latest on Supreme Court arguments on excluding black jurors (all times local):

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: US

facebook
Hit "Like"
Don't miss any important news
Thanks, you don't need to show me this anymore.