Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-111_new2_22p3.pdf
Page Number: 59.0

8 

MASTERPIECE CAKESHOP, LTD. v. COLORADO 

CIVIL RIGHTS COMM’N
 
GINSBURG, J., dissenting
 

rado Court of Appeals considered the case de novo.  What 
prejudice  infected  the  determinations  of  the  adjudicators 
in  the  case  before  and  after  the  Commission?    The  Court 
does  not  say.    Phillips’  case  is  thus  far  removed  from  the
only  precedent  upon  which  the  Court  relies,  Church  of 
Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U. S. 520 (1993),
where  the  government  action  that  violated  a  principle  of
religious neutrality implicated a sole decisionmaking body, 
the city council, see id., at 526–528. 

* 

* 
For the reasons stated, sensible application of CADA to
a  refusal  to  sell  any  wedding  cake  to  a  gay  couple  should 
occasion  affirmance  of  the  Colorado  Court  of  Appeals’
judgment.  I would so rule. 

*