Supreme Court to weigh free speech, discrimination in wedding cake case

By Lydia Wheeler

The Supreme Court has a tough question ahead: Where do you draw the line between free speech and discrimination?

The case headed to the high court in the new term that begins next month centers on Jack Phillips, the owner of the Colorado-based Masterpiece Cakeshop who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.

Phillips claims he shouldn’t be forced to under the state’s anti-discrimination law and gained a strong ally this week when the Trump administration filed a friend of the court brief on his behalf.

Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall and DOJ attorneys claim there is no clear line between Phillips’s speech and that of his clients when he designs and creates a custom wedding cake.

“He is not merely tolerating someone else’s message on his property; he is giving effect to their message by crafting a unique product with his own two hands,” the administration said in its 41-page brief.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

2 COMMENTS

  1. In primitive southern states, five out of six bakeries in a town may take up their “rights” to not make the cake for a perfectly legal event. The one remaining baker is at considerable risk of losing business and being shunned by the majority of the bigoted townsfolk by being outed in this way. Ensuring that there is no right of refusal for legitimate customers gives excuses to all for their now mandated behaviours of being a public business to serve the public.

  2. @OP – “He is not merely tolerating someone else’s message on his property; he is giving effect to their message by crafting a unique product with his own two hands,” the administration said in its 41-page brief.

    Yeh! Right! – a bit like the those who “crafted the internet” passing on someone else’s messages, or people in the postal service passing on orders for cakes to bigots running businesses!

    Phillips claims he shouldn’t be forced to under the state’s anti-discrimination law and gained a strong ally this week when the Trump administration filed a friend of the court brief on his behalf.

    Ah! Those “wonderful” faith-interpretation-blinkers which can “reinterpret” words like ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW to mean what ever a faith-thinker wants them to mean!

    when the Trump administration filed a friend of the court brief on his behalf.

    … . . and as we know, Trump has the “reinterpretation of laws” off to such a fine art, that he regularly takes it upon himself to correct those “so-called-judges” – with their “so-called-law-books”, and their “so-called legal records and precedents”! 🙂

Leave a Reply