The Supreme Court’s Same-Sex Wedding Cake Ruling Does Not Dismantle LGBTQ Protections | Eater
"Run by baker Jack Phillips, this Colorado cake shop became the focus of a high-profile dispute after he refused to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple, David Mullins and Charlie Craig. The Supreme Court issued a narrow 7–2 ruling in the baker’s favor on the ground that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission displayed unconstitutional hostility toward his religious-liberty claim, but it stopped short of resolving whether making wedding cakes is expressive conduct under the First Amendment or whether religious objections can override state public-accommodations laws. Justice Clarence Thomas (joined by Gorsuch) argued in concurrence that wedding cakes are inherently expressive and compelling their creation would alter the baker’s message, while a dissent by Justice Ginsburg (joined by Sotomayor) defended the Commission’s multi-layered, neutral review and emphasized that the baker refused a service to same-sex couples that he would provide to opposite-sex couples. Advocacy and legal groups remain divided—some warn the decision will be widely (and perhaps mistakenly) read as permitting discrimination, others (including the ACLU) view aspects of the opinion as reaffirming states’ ability to prevent marketplace discrimination—while amici such as Chefs for Equality contended that food preparation is not a core First Amendment activity. The ruling leaves the deeper constitutional conflicts unresolved and likely invites further litigation, including a pending florist case presenting similar legal questions." - Andrea Strong
