On June 4, the US Supreme Court issued a ruling in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, a case that pitted Colorado’s anti-discrimination law against arguments for freedom of speech and of religion.
In this case, two gay men asked a Colorado baker to make them a wedding cake, and the baker refused, saying that same-sex marriage violated his religious beliefs, and baking their wedding cake would therefore violate his beliefs.
The Supreme Court’s ruling, which was actually vague and indecisive, garnered a great deal of media attention, much of it misleading.
Headlines such as “Baker Wins!” persuaded many people that the ruling had negated existing laws protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination – although that was not, in fact, the outcome of the case.
On this episode of OutSources, hosts Janis Bohan and Glenda Russell talk with local attorney Jodi Martin who deftly brings clarity to this fuzzy ruling.
Learn what the ruling really said, and also listen in on our discussion of why the Court might have chosen to “punt” this issue and how it might be related to Justice Anthony Kennedy’s impending retirement. Or not.
- Justice Kennedy’s Masterpiece Ruling (The Atlantic)
- Why you shouldn’t freak out about the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling (Vox)
- The Masterpiece Decision: For Now, Everyone Can Still Have Cake (Jodi Martin blog post)