Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado
- Cassidy White
- Jun 24, 2019
- 2 min read
Charlie Craig and David Mullins, a same-sex couple from Colorado, wanted to be legally married in the eyes of the law in Massachusetts, then return to Colorado. At the time, Colorado’s state constitution did not allow the marriage of same-sex couples.
The couple visited Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado with the hopes of ordering themselves a wedding cake. The owner, Jack Philips, would not take the couple’s order because he is a Christian who believes that same-sex marriage is against his religious views. However, Philips informed the couple that they could purchase other pastries and baked goods from the shop.
Craig and Mullins left the shop and went to find another bakery that would let them purchase a wedding cake. About a week later, Craig and Mullins filed a report to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission under the public accommodations law and the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act which does not allow businesses to discriminate against their customers based upon race, sex, religion, gender, or sexual orientation.
Philips tried to use the free exercise clause as a defense, the court ruled in favor of the same-sex couple stating that Philips violated the Colorado Discrimination Laws. When the case was taken to the Supreme Court, they ruled that he was protected by the free exercise clause.
The Court stated “Religious and Philosophical objections to same-sex marriage are protected views and can be protected forms of expression.”
The video (linked below) explains a similar case involving a man named William Jack. In Jack’s case, it was ruled that he could refuse to make a cake for a same-sex couple. This case also took place in Colorado.
I agree with the court’s ruling. Philips is violating Colorado's Discrimination Laws because he turned down a same-sex couple due to his religion views. If Philips said he was turning the couple down because of the laws of Colorado, I believe this would be a different story.
Sources:
Comments