‘Gay wedding cake’ case may echo in Arizona cities

The U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday will hear arguments in a dispute between a same-sex couple and a Colorado cake designer who refused to serve them.

But the court’s decision may impact more than wedding cake in Colorado. It could redefine the line between free speech and discrimination nationwide.

The Masterpiece Cakeshop lawsuit centers on a Colorado law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is similar to anti-discrimination ordinances enacted by cities around the country — including Phoenix and other Arizona cities such as Tempe, Flagstaff and Tucson.

Arizona does not have a statewide law.

The shop’s owner believes designing a cake for a gay couple equates to him endorsing their vows, something he said his religious beliefs do not permit him to do. The Colorado law therefore violates his freedom of expression

and religion, the baker’s suit alleges.

If the high court agrees with him, the precedent could weaken or even void anti-discrimination protections for lesbian, bisexual, gay and transgender individuals — and possibly other protected groups — across the country.

But if the court sides with Colorado, as the lower courts have done, the decision could bring an end to a flurry of similar lawsuits across the country attempting to unravel anti-discrimination laws, including a case in Phoenix.

Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterlenged Cakeshop, is one of several Christian business owners in the wedding industry who have taken local governments to court over anti-discrimination laws in recent years.

But his is the only one to make it to the Supreme Court.

Scottsdale-based Alliance Defending Freedom, a non-profit legal organization that focuses on religious liberties, has represented these individuals — from bakers to calligraphers to photographers — in their battles across the country. The conservative group also represented Hobby Lobby in its successful 2014 religious-freedom case before the Supreme Court.

The group has had limited success with the anti-discrimination cases.

In October, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that Phoenix’s anti-discrimination ordinance does not violate Arizona’s free speech and free exercise of religion laws. Alliance Defending Freedom has appealed that ruling.

In that case, a duo of evangelical wedding-invitation designers sued the city because they fear they will face a fine if they decline to design invitations for a same-sex couple. So far, no gay couple has requested their services.

During oral arguments in that case, Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Samuel Green told the judge that forcing his clients to serve gay couples would be “compelled expression of speech.”

Phoenix First Amendment attorney Dan Barr, one of the lawyers who chalpiece Arizona’s now-defunct law banning same-sex couples from marrying, said all of these lawsuits hinge on the same First Amendment questions:

Is cake making (invitation designing, etc.) speech? And if so, what is the message and whose message is it?

Barr said it’s likely a stretch to consider these services speech. But even if it were considered speech, the message — whether it be congratulating someone on a wedding or wishing someone “happy birthday” — isn’t coming from the designer but from the person who purchased the product, Barr said.

“When was the last time you went to a birthday party and saw the cake and said, ‘What a wonderful message from the baker’?” Barr said.