Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf
Page Number: 15.0

12 

MASTERPIECE CAKESHOP, LTD. v. COLORADO 
CIVIL RIGHTS COMM’N
 
Opinion of the Court 

gay persons or gay marriages.  See Jack v. Gateaux, Ltd., 
Charge No. P20140071X (Mar. 24, 2015); Jack v. Le Bak-
ery Sensual, Inc., Charge No. P20140070X (Mar. 24, 2015); 
Jack v. Azucar Bakery, Charge No. P20140069X (Mar. 24, 
2015).

There  were,  to  be  sure,  responses  to  these  arguments
that the State could make when it contended for a differ-
ent  result  in  seeking  the  enforcement  of  its  generally 
applicable  state  regulations  of  businesses  that  serve  the 
public.  And any decision in favor of the baker would have
to  be  sufficiently  constrained,  lest  all  purveyors  of  goods 
and  services  who  object  to  gay  marriages  for  moral  and
religious reasons in effect be allowed to put up signs say-
ing  “no  goods  or  services  will  be  sold  if  they  will  be  used 
for gay marriages,” something that would impose a serious
stigma  on  gay  persons.    But,  nonetheless,  Phillips  was
entitled  to  the  neutral  and  respectful  consideration  of  his 
claims in all the circumstances of the case. 

B 
The neutral and respectful consideration to which Phil-
lips  was  entitled  was  compromised  here,  however.    The 
Civil Rights Commission’s treatment of his case has some 
elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the
sincere religious beliefs that motivated his objection. 

That  hostility  surfaced  at  the  Commission’s  formal, 
public  hearings,  as  shown  by  the  record.    On  May  30, 
2014, the seven-member Commission convened publicly to
consider Phillips’ case.  At several points during its meet-
ing, commissioners endorsed the view that religious beliefs 
cannot  legitimately  be  carried  into  the  public  sphere  or 
commercial  domain,  implying  that  religious  beliefs  and 
persons are less than fully welcome in Colorado’s business
community.  One  commissioner  suggested  that  Phillips
can  believe  “what  he  wants  to  believe,”  but  cannot  act  on 
his  religious  beliefs  “if  he  decides  to  do  business  in  the