Gay bakery
In Masterpiece, the Bakery Wins the Battle but Loses the War
In the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled for a bakery that had refused to sell a wedding cake to a homosexual couple. It did so on grounds that are specific to this particular case and will hold little to no applicability to future cases. The opinion is full of reaffirmations of our country’s longstanding rule that states can bar businesses that are open to the public from turning customers away because of who they are.
The case involves Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig, a same-sex couple who went to the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Denver in search of a cake for their wedding reception. When the bakery refused to sell Dave and Charlie a wedding cake because they’re same-sex attracted, the couple sued under Colorado’s longstanding nondiscrimination statute. The bakery claimed that the Constitution’s protections of free speech and release of religion gave it the right to discriminate and to override the state’s civil rights commandment. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled against the bakery, and a mention appeals c
Bakery Wins Supreme Court Appeal in ‘Gay Cake’ Case
On Tuesday 10th October the Supreme Court ruled that the bakery in the high profile ‘gay cake’ case had won their appeal against a discrimination claim. The Employment Commandment team at Thompson Smith and Puxon considers the implications for Employment Rule of this ruling.
The knowledge will be familiar to you by now. Help in Mr Gareth Lee (associated with the LGBT community in Northern Ireland) placed an order at Asher’s Bakery, County Antrim for a cake with the slogan ‘Support Queer Marriage’. The order for the cake was initially accepted by an employee but the business owners subsequently rejected the organize as the slogan was against their religious views. The order was refunded and Mr Lee purchased the cake from another bakery.
Following the cancellation of the order, Mr Lee sued the bakery under Northern Irish regulations which prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in the provision of goods and services, and claimed discrimination on the grounds of political opinion.
In May the Christian-run bakery lost the case at the County
North Carolina bakery makes 'please say gay' cakes in response to Parents' Bill of Rights law
DURHAM, N.C. -- When Matt Bumpas first heard House Bill also known as the Parents' Bill of Rights--was on the move in the North Carolina General Assembly, he did what he does best. He took the contest to the kitchen.
"All this hate mongering really has me angry. It's strenuous to talk about. I'm really in disbelief and I really wanted to something that spoke back to them," said Bumpas. "It's silencing gay voices. It's silencing our allies who utter up for us and recognize we contribute to North Carolina and our communities just as much as any other family."
Bumpas runs Sweet Bumpas Cakes, a Durham-based place bakery that took off at the height of the COVID pandemic. The former pastry chef moved to North Carolina from Seattle with his husband Thang. He launched his bakery to earn a decent living in the Bull City.
Then lawmakers began debating HB The measure bans the teaching of sexual identities and gender orientations to kids in kindergarten thro
'Gay cake' row: What is the dispute about?
In October , the owners of the bakery missing their appeal against the decision that their refusal to create a "gay cake" was discriminatory.
Appeal court judges said that, under law, the bakers were not allowed to provide a service only to people who agreed with their religious beliefs, external.
Reacting to the ruling, Daniel McArthur from Ashers said he was "extremely disappointed" adding that it undermined "democratic freedom, religious release and free speech".
The firm then took the case to the Supreme Court and they won.
The UK's highest court ruled the bakery's refusal to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage was not discriminatory.
Then president of the Supreme Court, Lady Hale, ruled the bakers did not refuse to fulfil the order because of the customer's sexual orientation.
"They would possess refused to make such a cake for any customer, irrespective of their sexual orientation," she said.
"Their objection was to the message on the cake, not to