Earlier this month, the Supreme Court finally ruled on the case of Jack Phillips, the Christian baker who creates gorgeous custom cakes and was found guilty before the Colorado Commission on Human Rights for declining to use his talents to serve a same-sex wedding.
SCOTUS, stunningly, ruled in Phillips’ favor, overturning the Commission’s ruling that he had violated Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws due to the panel’s open hostility towards Phillips’ faith, which they found was a direct violation of his First Amendment rights to a trail from a government that would not regard his faith in the process of carrying out the law.
In the ruling, Justice Kennedy had said that the issue as to whether or not a Christian business owner has the right under the First Amendment to decline to provide services for a same-sex wedding would have to be ruled on later, so we patiently await that day and pray that the First Amendment will be upheld by the SCOTUS.
However, another Christian small business owner who has been through years of legal battles had the opportunity, following the Masterpiece Cake Shop v. Colorado Human Rights Commission ruling, to have her case heard before the Court, and they also ruled in her favor, turning her case back to the entity that had originally ruled against her, destroying her business.
The Daily Wire reports:
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that a Washington state court would have to reconsider its ruling against a florist who served a gay couple for over ten years but would not do their wedding flowers.
The Court stated vis-à-vis Arlene’s Flowers v. Washington, “The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Washington for further consideration in light of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm’n.”
The Arlene’s Flowers case revolved around whether the creation and sale of custom floral arrangements to celebrate a wedding ceremony was considered artistic expression, and if it was, whether compelling the florist to create a wedding cake that violated her religious beliefs violated the free speech clause and the free exercise clause. The case was brought after Barronelle Stutzman, a Washington state florist, refused to provide original flower arrangements to a same-sex couple for their wedding after having served one of the men for roughly ten years. The state courts rejected her argument that requiring her to design floral arrangements for same-sex weddings would violate her First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of her religion; that triggered Stutzman to ask the Supreme Court to review the state courts’ decision.
Stutzman’s appeal was put on hold by the court until they ruled on the Masterpiecedecision. Stutzman had been fined by the state courts and ordered to provide the same services to same-sex couples that she provides to opposite-sex couples.
We have been waiting for justice to find its way to Stuzman, an elderly grandmother who loves the Lord and was happy to serve homosexual customers in any other capacity.
We give God all the praise for the relief these two business owners have been given after everything they’ve been through!