Gay wedding cake Supreme Court might be the case, influenced by the past litigation

in the vicinity

Supreme Court hears same-sex wedding cake case

Citing his Christian faith, Colorado baker, Jack Phillips, was sued because he refused a cake for a same-sex couple.

The Supreme court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in a potentially landmark case that pits religious freedom against the anti-discrimination laws.

The controversy began when Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple in the year 2012, citing his religious beliefs. While he claims that he serves, the one who comes in his shop, he did not offer for any event.

A state civil rights Commission sanctioned Phillips after the gay couple filed a formal complaint.

“This case has never been about cakes. It is about the rights of gays and lesbians to enjoy the same level of service in the company, and not afraid of being rejected because of who you are,” David Mullins, the have tried, to the Commission, Phillips to bake a wedding cake in 2012, told Fox News. “It’s about basic access to public life.”

After nearly 90 minutes of oral arguments, the judges of the Supreme court seemed to be evenly distributed along the ideological lines on the case. A ruling is expected by June 2018.

Here are two other cases, could be a useful tool for the judge’s decision.

Upper gefell v. Hodges

Upper gefell v. Hodges, the monument-symbol of 2015 Supreme Court case that same-sex marriage legal across the country. The nation’s highest court determined that the 14th Amendment guarantees same-sex couples marriage licenses.

Supporters of the homosexual to legalize marriage rally in front of the Supreme Court prior to its decision, in principle, it is nationwide.

(Reuters/Joshua Roberts)

Justice Anthony Kennedy delivered the opinion of the court along with Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with judge Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and the late Antonin Scalia dissented.

Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc.

In the year of 1964, two African-Americans had service refused to Piggie Park drive-in in Columbia, S. C., because of their race. In the civil rights suit that followed, Piggie Park owner, Maurice Bessinger, for refusal founded to serve black customers, based on his religious beliefs opposing “integration of the races at all.”

By the time Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. it has to the Supreme Court in 1968, has been represented, the question of the award of fees to the lawyers for the black South Carolinians who sued for Bessinger’s restaurants. But in a footnote to its unsigned 8-0 opinion, the court invoked the religious freedom argument and for Bessinger other-defense “manifestly frivolous.”

Civil rights lawyers have pointed out that the footnote as a possible guide to current judges in relation to the gay cake case.

Fox News’ Bill Mears and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Follow us

Don't be shy, get in touch. We love meeting interesting people and making new friends.

Most popular