USA TODAY International Edition
Florist who denied gays gets new hearing
The high court sent the case to Washington’s Supreme Court to determine whether Barronelle Stutzman was treated fairly.
WASHINGTON – When it comes to creating products for same-sex weddings, the Supreme Court reasoned Monday that what’s good for the baker is good for the florist.
After ruling that a Colorado baker was treated unfairly for refusing on religious grounds to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, the justices said a Washington state florist deserves another chance to challenge lower court rulings against her.
Rather than agree to hear the case of Arlene’s Flowers next term or deny its owner’s appeal outright, the high court sent the case back to Washington’s Supreme Court to determine whether Barronelle Stutzman was treated fairly by state courts.
That leaves unresolved the central dispute between proponents of gay rights and religious objectors: whether anti-discrimination laws in 22 states can require businesses to serve samesex weddings against their beliefs.
The court’s 7-2 ruling this month in the case of Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, did not resolve whether an array of same-sex marriage opponents can refuse commercial services available to opposite-sex couples.
In that case, the majority agreed that Phillips was met with “religious hostility” on the part of a state civil rights commission that ruled against him while allowing other bakers to turn away a customer seeking cakes with anti-gay messages.
Justice Anthony Kennedy said business owners generally cannot deny equal access to goods and services under anti-discrimination laws without creating “a community-wide stigma inconsistent with the history and dynamics of civil rights laws.”
Like Phillips, Stutzman appealed a lower court’s ruling that the state’s antidiscrimination law required her to serve gay and straight couples equally.
After the justices sent the baker’s case back to Colorado for review, Stutzman’s lawyers sought the same treatment, contending that the state trial court “has treated Barronelle with neither tolerance nor respect.” Monday, they claimed an initial victory.
“The justices agree that her case, and the judgment against her, should be reconsidered,” said the Alliance Defending Freedom, which has represented Phillips and Stutzman.
State officials and the American Civil Liberties Union representing the gay couple urged the court to deny her appeal. “We are confident that the Washington state Supreme Court will rule once again in favor of the samesex couple and reaffirm its decision that no business has a right to discriminate,” said the ACLU’s James Esseks.