Masterpiece Cakeshop Baker Loses Appeal Over Gender-Transition Cake

MSgt Robert "Rock" Aldi - do they tell non-LGBT dudes who are carrying a pistol that they are not allowed in? Not discrimination, and a red herring.

1SG Patrick Burke - that an attempt to deflect the responsibility for the illegal discriminatory conduct of Jack Phillips and his staff. They were perfectly happy to make the cake until they found out that the buyer was transgender. There were no decorations or other "speech" involved.

And yes, they picked him intentionally.

Capt Gregory Prickett well then it was never about a cake. He was in the business of making cakes. They sought him out for something other than his craft, rather it was about forcing him to accept their ideology. They could have got the cake elsewhere, but it was about taking his livelihood away from him.

1SG Patrick Burke - You should really read the original SCOTUS opinion. He didn't win on a freedom of religion basis, and SCOTUS said that Colorado could make the LGBTQ community a protected class that it would be illegal to discriminate against. He won because the Colorado civil rights division was not neutral in their hearing of the case.

Several things happened since then. First, he decided to continue to discriminate against a protected class., Second, a member of that protected class, a lawyer who understood the SCOTUS decision, attempted to purchase a simple cake that did not require him to exercise any artistry or speech in its preparation. Fourth, once he found out her protected status, he discriminated against her on the basis of that class. Fifth, this time Colorado gave him a hearing that was neutral, and the appeals/lawsuits began.

The appellate court stated: "[A] proprietor may not refuse to sell a nonexpressive product to a protected person based on that person’s intent to use the product as part of a celebration that the producer considers offensive." Scardina v. Masterpiece, 2023COA8, ℙ 82 (Colo. App., 2023). It further noted that: "We conclude that creating a pink cake with blue frosting is not inherently expressive and any message or symbolism it provides to
an observer would not be attributed to the baker. Thus, CADA does not compel Masterpiece and Phillips to speak through the creation and sale of such a cake to Scardina." Id., at ℙ 83.

"[A] proprietor’s actions based on their religious beliefs must be considered in light of a customer’s right to be free from discrimination based on their protected status. The Supreme Court has long held that the Free Exercise Clause does not relieve a person from the obligation to comply with a neutral law of general applicability. Both our state and federal courts have concluded that CADA is a neutral law of general applicability." Id., at ℙ 87 (internal citation omitted).

The Colorado courts followed the law that SCOTUS established in its first opinion. Phillips wasn't smart enough to learn from the first case, now he has to either comply with the law or deal with the consequences.