Supreme Court dodges dispute over christian baker, same-sex wedding

[jimnyc]

I wonder for how long the atheists of the world will purposely push places like this. I still say they go my route with a shit cake. But it may take the SC making a decision to end the back and forth.

And another one around the 1st amendment.

---

Supreme Court dodges dispute over christian baker, same-sex wedding

The Supreme Court lifted an order Monday punishing a Christian baker in Oregon who refused to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, telling a lower court to reconsider the dispute in light of the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop decision.

The decision keeps a contentious social dispute over the rights of religious dissenters and LGBT patrons off the high court’s docket in the near term.

“This is a victory for Aaron and Melissa Klein and for religious liberty for all Americans,” said Kelly Shackelford, president of First Liberty Institute, a cause lawyering firm that represents the Klein family. “The Constitution protects speech, popular or not, from condemnation by the government. The message from the Court is clear, government hostility toward religious Americans will not be tolerated.”

The Oregon case is in many respects a redux of the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop decision, which pertained to an Evangelical baker in Colorado. Though the justices found for the Colorado baker because a state panel displayed hostility toward his religious beliefs, the Court did not say whether conservative religious believers can cite the First Amendment in refusing to accommodate a same-sex wedding. Like the Colorado baker, the Kleins say forcing them to create a cake violates

Monday’s dispute arose in Oregon in 2013 when Aaron and Melissa Klein, who created custom baked goods through their business “Sweet Cakes by Melissa,” declined to produce a wedding cake for a lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman. The Kleins are Christians who believe marriage was instituted as a union of men and women.

Cryer and Bowman filed a complaint with a state anti-discrimination panel. In turn, the Kleins argued their actions were protected under the First Amendment’s free speech and free exercise of religion clauses.

In a subsequent proceeding, state officials found that the Kleins violated Oregon’s public accommodations law. The Kleins were ordered to pay out a $135,000 fine and cease discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. They have since closed their business because of the financial penalty.

A state court in Oregon upheld that decision, finding that cakes do not deserve full First Amendment protection because they incorporate many non-expressive elements, and whatever expression they convey is not imputed to the creator. The court further found that precedent barred the Kleins’ free exercise claim.

Rest - https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/17/m...ristian-baker/

[Kathianne]

I wonder for how long the atheists of the world will purposely push places like this. I still say they go my route with a shit cake. But it may take the SC making a decision to end the back and forth.

And another one around the 1st amendment.

---

Supreme Court dodges dispute over christian baker, same-sex wedding

The Supreme Court lifted an order Monday punishing a Christian baker in Oregon who refused to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, telling a lower court to reconsider the dispute in light of the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop decision.

The decision keeps a contentious social dispute over the rights of religious dissenters and LGBT patrons off the high court’s docket in the near term.

“This is a victory for Aaron and Melissa Klein and for religious liberty for all Americans,” said Kelly Shackelford, president of First Liberty Institute, a cause lawyering firm that represents the Klein family. “The Constitution protects speech, popular or not, from condemnation by the government. The message from the Court is clear, government hostility toward religious Americans will not be tolerated.”

The Oregon case is in many respects a redux of the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop decision, which pertained to an Evangelical baker in Colorado. Though the justices found for the Colorado baker because a state panel displayed hostility toward his religious beliefs, the Court did not say whether conservative religious believers can cite the First Amendment in refusing to accommodate a same-sex wedding. Like the Colorado baker, the Kleins say forcing them to create a cake violates

Monday’s dispute arose in Oregon in 2013 when Aaron and Melissa Klein, who created custom baked goods through their business “Sweet Cakes by Melissa,” declined to produce a wedding cake for a lesbian couple, Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman. The Kleins are Christians who believe marriage was instituted as a union of men and women.

Cryer and Bowman filed a complaint with a state anti-discrimination panel. In turn, the Kleins argued their actions were protected under the First Amendment’s free speech and free exercise of religion clauses.

In a subsequent proceeding, state officials found that the Kleins violated Oregon’s public accommodations law. The Kleins were ordered to pay out a $135,000 fine and cease discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. They have since closed their business because of the financial penalty.

A state court in Oregon upheld that decision, finding that cakes do not deserve full First Amendment protection because they incorporate many non-expressive elements, and whatever expression they convey is not imputed to the creator. The court further found that precedent barred the Kleins’ free exercise claim.

Rest - https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/17/m...ristian-baker/

I agree with the lawyer from The First Liberty Institute. SCOTUS is telling the state supremes to look at the Masterpiece decision, which was in favor of the business. If these groups and state courts keep doing what they've been doing, they are going to get a precedent that will be very difficult to work around.

[STTAB]

I agree with the lawyer from The First Liberty Institute. SCOTUS is telling the state supremes to look at the Masterpiece decision, which was in favor of the business. If these groups and state courts keep doing what they've been doing, they are going to get a precedent that will be very difficult to work around.

I think SCOTUS is continually doing this country a disservice by simply not being plainer. Are they cowards? Just make a clear ruling "no you can not force a company to violate their legitimate religous beliefs"

and in actuality I would like to see it go further. I'd like to see SCOTUS rule that it is obviously unconstitoinal to tell a business that they can discriminate, but not for certain things.