Make no mistake — if our rightward-tilting Supreme Court rules that religious tenets trump the law, then more than one slippery slope will be created. Even if the Court were to limit its holding to bakers making custom cakes, this decision is fraught.
If a baker can refuse equal service, what other business may do so? The newest Justice, Neil M.
A society might determine, for example, that anti-polygamy laws disfavor one particular family structure and thus cause unfair treatment of those within that structure. Eater at Home Eater at Home. But Kennedy might well be able, in the end, to lead a majority in a very narrow decision against the Colorado commission, but not necessarily in favor of Jack Phillips and other religiously-oriented businesses.
One can make numerous arguments against polygamy that have no connection to arguments about same-sex marriage. Bineham is a professor of rhetoric in the Department of Communication Studies at St. Does a right to marry carry full protection for the customs and opportunities associated with marriage?
Probably safe, then, to count those four as likely to cast votes for the Colorado civil rights law and its enforcement against Masterpiece Bakeshop. But Araiza also points out that the brief has its limits.
And it leaves the door open for another case, which may come after Kennedy has retired and is replaced by a Trump appointee. Lawyers for Masterpiece Cakeshop and its baker maintain that his wedding cakes are a form of creative expression protected by the First Amendment, and that he cannot be compelled by the government — in this case the Colorado Civil Rights Commission — to create expression with which he disagrees.
The Colorado Civil Rights Commission ordered Phillips to forgo baking wedding cakes unless he agreed to bake the same cakes for same-sex couples as he would for heterosexual couples. Over the years, Justice Anthony M. Loading comments