Wedding cake and free speech
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm'n
In brief
The Supreme Court overturned the Colorado appeals court’s judgment in Phillips’s case.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 7-2 · June 4, 2018 · Opinion by Justice Kagan
- What it’s about
- Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, refused to make a wedding cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins because of his religious beliefs.
- Who it affects
- The Colorado appeals court’s judgment in the dispute involving Phillips, Craig and Mullins no longer stands.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court overturned the Colorado Court of Appeals’ ruling, deciding that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s hostile treatment of Phillips’s religious beliefs violated the First Amendment’s protection for religious exercise.
Jack Phillips owned Masterpiece Cakeshop. He refused to make a wedding cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins because of his religious beliefs.
The dispute centered on how Colorado’s public-accommodations law applied to a baker’s religious objection to making a custom wedding cake.
Question presented
Whether applying Colorado’s public-accommodations law to compel a cake maker to create a custom wedding cake expressing a message with which the cake maker disagrees violates the Free Speech or Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment?
What the Court decided
Holding
Judgment REVERSED. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Breyer, Alito, Kagan, and Gorsuch, JJ., joined. Kagan, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Breyer, J., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Alito, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Gorsuch, J., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Sotomayor, J., joined.
- Result
- Reversed
The vote
- Joined the judgment
- Concurred in a separate opinion
- Dissented
- Wrote an opinion
- Majority · 6joined the Court's opinion
- Concurring · 1agreed with the result, wrote separately
- Thomaswrote separately
- Dissenting · 2disagreed with the result
- Ginsburgwrote the dissent
- Sotomayor
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished its action on this docket.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 3 moreShow fewer
Opinion added: Opinion
Opinion added: opinion
Brief added: Questions Presented
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.