Accessibility Tools

Skip to main content

GAY BIAS CLAIM AGAINST WEDDING CAKE MAKER ADDRESSED

Written on .

Another long-awaited Supreme Court ruling dealt with whether a baker who wouldn’t make a wedding cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding violated the civil rights of the gay couple.  Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, No. 16-111 (U.S., 6/4/18).  The baker told the couple he didn’t make cakes for same-sex weddings, and contended his religious views did not allow such activity.  The Supreme Court eventually resolved the case in the baker’s favor, but did not address the baker’s principal defense.  Instead, Justice Kennedy said the Colorado civil rights tribunal that virtually decided the case made certain statements that disparage religion and "cast doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the Commission’s adjudication."

Justice Kennedy indicated the Court wasn’t deciding whether other business owners have a right not to take part in gay weddings, stating those issues "must await further elaboration in the courts."  The Justice recognized that both sides in the case raised legitimate concerns.  "Our society has come to the recognition that gay persons and gay couples cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth," he wrote.  "For that reason, the laws  in the Constitution can, and in some instances must, protect them in the exercise of their civil rights."  But he added that:  "At the same time, the religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression." 

Thus, the issue of whether certain anti-discrimination laws prevail over religious beliefs still remains. 

Related Content

Get Email Updates

Receive newsletters and alerts directly in your email inbox. Sign up below.

Recent Content

ai, human reach out
A January 20, 2026, class action filed against Eightfold AI, Inc. in California is sending shockwaves through the employer and AI community…
danger sign, skull
A second “bombshell” affecting HR pertaining to AI is a federal court ruling in New York, that a defendant’s use of AI in researching and p…
CHAT GPT
Soon after the deciding of the above-discussed case on February 17, 2026, in U.S. v. Heppner, a criminal case in the District Court for the…
avoid, wave away
There are no easy answers to the above question, but some general observations will nevertheless be made.  First, the New York district cou…
ai visualization
Perhaps the starting point is to look at the type of AI platforms generally available.  At a recent conference about AI use for HR, speaker…
june 2026 legal immigration webinar promo graphic
The webinar will cover how to deal with a worksite enforcement action and various types of immigration enforcement activities. The webinar…