DENVER – In a unanimous decision issued this morning, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that a Lakewood Bakery unlawfully discriminated against David Mullins and Charlie Craig by refusing to sell them a cake for their wedding reception. The ruling affirms a finding in May 2014 from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that Masterpiece Cakeshop’s policy of turning away same-sex couples violates Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act.

“Today 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,” said Ria Mar, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT Project, who argued the case. “When every lesbian or gay person, every woman, every person of color, every person of every faith can walk into a store, a bank, a hospital, and know that they will get the same service as everyone else, we will have won. Until then, we continue to fight for the equal treatment we all deserve. Today we can celebrate this big win.”

In 2012, Colorado residents David Mullins and Charlie Craig, along with Charlie’s mother Deborah Munn, visited Masterpiece Cakeshop to order a wedding cake. Mullins and Craig planned to marry in Massachusetts and then celebrate with family and friends back home. Masterpiece owner Jack Phillips informed the couple that, because of his religious beliefs, it was his standard business practice to refuse to provide cakes to customers for same-sex weddings. Phillips has turned away several other couples for the same reason.

Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act prohibits businesses, such as Masterpiece Cakeshop, from refusing service based on factors including race, sex, national origin, or sexual orientation. The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Colorado filed suit on behalf of Mullins and Craig in 2013. In December 2013, an administrative judge ruled that the bakery had illegally discriminated against the couple. In 2014, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission affirmed that ruling. Masterpiece Cakeshop appealed.

According to the opinion, “Masterpiece remains free to continue espousing its religious beliefs, including its opposition to same-sex marriage. However, if it wishes to operate as a public accommodation and conduct business within the State of Colorado, CADA prohibits it from picking and choosing its customers based on their sexual orientation.”

When businesses and other institutions that serve the public have sought exemptions to laws barring discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, the courts have held that businesses are required to comply with anti-discrimination laws. The courts have ruled without regard to whether LGBT people could have obtained the goods or service elsewhere.  Instead the courts have recognized the harm to equal opportunity if lesbian and gay people can be turned away from businesses otherwise open to the public because of who they are.

more on this case

Date

Thursday, August 13, 2015 - 9:45am

Featured image

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

LGBTQ+ Equality Freedom of Expression & Religion

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

21

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Standard with sidebar

Show list numbers

August 7, 2015
“Today’s verdict in the Aurora Theater shooting trial means that James Holmes will spend the rest of his life behind bars. It is the appropriate and harsh punishment for his crimes.
“The jury recognized that executing someone with severe mental illness is morally and legally indefensible. It is fortunate that Colorado will not be in the terrible position of having to do so. Furthermore, this verdict means the victims and their family members will be spared from years of appeals and from having to relive the details of that night over and over.
“This verdict shows that Colorado, like the rest of the country, is moving away from the death penalty. It is deeply unfortunate that our taxpayer dollars had to pay for one of the most expensive trials in the state’s history only to achieve the same outcome offered by the defense before the trial even began. The death penalty is a costly, broken policy and this trial is proof of that. We are hopeful that lessons learned from this process will lead Coloradans to rethink this outdated and deeply flawed policy.”

Date

Friday, August 7, 2015 - 5:42pm

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Criminal Legal Reform

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

21

Style

Standard with sidebar


Racial Justice protest

According to documents recently obtained by The Intercept in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, the government is surveilling the #BlackLivesMatter movement.
Records from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Operations Coordination show that since August 2014, DHS officials have been trolling public social media accounts, including Facebook, Twitter, and Vine, to map and collect information on #BlackLivesMatter protests –and supposedly related events. Targeted activities include silent vigils held across the country following the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, an anti-police brutality protest in Philadelphia, and an April 2015 #BlackLivesMatter protest in Washington D.C.  The documents even show a plan to gather information on a funk music parade in a historically Black neighborhood in the nation’s capital.
Perhaps most troubling are the Google maps and live updates tracking, minute-by-minute, the movements of participants in an April 2015 #BlackLivesMatter protest in Washington, D.C.  A DHS email released to the Intercept confirms that on the day before the event, several DHS officials were aware of a Federal Bureau of Investigation joint intelligence bulletin characterizing the protest as a “First Amendment-protected event,” and noting that there was “no information suggesting that violent behavior is planned for Washington, DC.”
What will be done with this trove of information? We know that DHS shares what it gathers with local and federal law enforcement for targeting police stops and investigations. Information about specific individuals can also be funneled into the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting system, which provides reports to the FBI through regional fusion centers.
The problem with this is obvious. Modern protest movements speak, associate, and organize through social media. Their tweets, blogs, protests, marches, and die-ins are the trumpets by which they call for reform and social justice. Government monitoring of activists’ protests – simply because these activists dissent and without any evidence of wrongdoing – threatens to discourage them from speaking, associating, and expressing as is their right under the First Amendment. Surveillance of #BlackLivesMatter protests also opens the door to racial profiling because the movement is Black-led.
Throughout our country’s history, the federal government has used the fear of threats – real or perceived – to conduct surveillance on domestic groups and people who look or act different. Civil rights and anti-Vietnam War activists in the 1960’s and 1970’s, American Muslim civil rights leaders and academics post-9/11, and the FBI’s recent, expansive racial, religious, and ethnic mapping program are a handful of examples.
Today, at a time when the public is outraged and sickened that Black men and women are killed by police in too many incidents raising concerns about racial profiling, excessive force, and gross disregard for Black lives, the tracking of #BlackLivesMatter threatens to harm that movement and all others seeking equal treatment for minority Americans.
Progress toward racial justice in America has been made precisely because brave people, particularly people of color, have raised their voices to hold America accountable to its promises of equality and liberty. Courageous men and women of color have stood up in order to call for the abolition of the chattel slavery, to urge the adoption of a constitutional amendment promising equal protection of the law, to demand an end to the legalized racial segregation that ruled America for 90 years, and to insist on federal protection for Black people’s right to vote after decades of disenfranchisement through enforced terror.
The generations of civil rights activists who made these calls were branded as “dangerous,” “terrorist,” and “subversive.”  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., his family, his colleagues in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Congress for Racial Equality, and countless other individuals and groups heralded today for their vision of racial equality in America were victims of FBI surveillance in the 1960’s.
Surveillance of today’s civil rights activists is equally wrong. We do not need to wait 50 years to understand that.

Date

Tuesday, August 4, 2015 - 11:47am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Government Transparency Racial Justice Freedom of Expression & Religion Privacy & Technology

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

21

Style

Standard with sidebar

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU Colorado RSS