²ÝÝ®ÊÓƵAPP¹ÙÍø

Legal Principle at Issue

Did Colorado’s enforcement of its anti-discrimination law First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and free exercise of religion? Was the Colorado Civil Rights Commission neutral in its treatment of petitioner’s religious beliefs?

Action

The Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Masterpiece Cakeshop, but the decision was narrow. It did not establish a broad precedent about religious freedom or LGBTQ+ rights. Instead, the Court focused on how the Colorado Civil Rights Commission handled the case, stating it showed "clear and impermissible hostility" toward Phillips’ religious beliefs. The opinion did not say that businesses have a general right to deny services to same-sex couples based on religious beliefs and left open the broader constitutional questions about the conflict between anti-discrimination laws and religious freedom.

Facts/Syllabus

Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, refused to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple, Charlie Craig and David Mullins, in 2012. Phillips cited his religious beliefs as the reason, saying making the cake would violate his Christian convictions. The couple filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is prohibited under Colorado's public accommodations law.

Importance of Case

The case was more about procedural fairness than resolving the broader legal conflict. The Court signaled that religious objections must be taken seriously, but also that anti-discrimination protections remain important.