[JURIST] A Colorado state appeals court [official website] ruled [text, PDF] on Thursday that a baker violated Colorado’s public accommodations law when he refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The baker, Jack Phillips, refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, claiming that creating the cake would violate his rights to free speech and religious freedom. The appeals court disagreed with Phillips, stating that the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) [PDF] “prohibits places of public accommodations from basing their refusal to serve customers on their sexual orientation,” and the bakery violated the law by refusing to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The bakery can maintain their religious beliefs, but it is prohibited from “picking and choosing customers based on their sexual orientation” if it wants to remain open to the public. Phillip’s attorney said they are considering appealing the case to the US Supreme Court. The American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado (ACLU) attorney Ria Mar, who argued the case for the same-sex couple, said in a statement [ACLU report] that “[t]oday is a proud day for equality and for upholding the law. In America, no one should be turned away from a shop or restaurant because of who they are or who they love.”

LGBT individuals have recently suffered from discrimination at places of public of public accommodation, despite the US Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage as constitutional right [JURIST report]. Indiana’s controversial Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) [JURIST commentary] law took effect in July, one of many such bills to take effect around the country. The bill, as originally written, made it legal for private businesses to refuse service to potential customers because of their sexual orientation. Many believe that this would in essence legalize discrimination against the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) community. After much objection, the state legislature amended [JURIST report] the bill, which now “bars discrimination based on race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or U.S. military service.” The law provides exemptions for churches, their schools and non-profit organizations. Nineteen other states have enacted some variety of religious freedom laws, most modeled after the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1993. In April Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson signed an amended version [JURIST report] of a ‘religious freedom law. The considerable backlash from the Indiana bill may be the reason Hutchinson declined to sign a similar bill [JURIST report] until state lawmakers brought it more in line with federal legislation.