Masterpiece Cakeshop, et al. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, No. 16-111 (U.S. Supreme Court).
Private cake shop proprietor Jack Phillips asks the Supreme Court to recognize conscience rights when it comes to custom cake creation. The State of Colorado has determined that its public accommodation law precludes Phillips’ determination that he cannot participate in same sex marriage celebrations by providing goods specifically made for such occasions.
At its core, the case asks whether civil rights measures are superior to conscience concerns. If Phillips must provide custom goods to all if he provides such goods to any, as Colorado insists, then public accommodations laws require that First Amendment interests in speech and religious matters yield to the state’s interest in civil rights. If speech and religious interests are retained notwithstanding the state’s command to accommodate all, those affected are uncertain of the efficacy of rights measures intended to ensure public equities.
Fifty amicus submissions accompanied Phillips’ brief before the Supreme Court. Supporters of respondents have recently begun filing amicus briefs.
To create an overview of petitioners’ supporters’ arguments, the attached table describes those positions in brief for the use of all who may have an interest in the case. The focus on petitioners’ amici is not reflective of the bloggers’ interest in only petitioners’ views, but rather reflects only that those views were submitted before respondents’ brief was filed, and as a practical matter have been reviewed first.