DENVER – The Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled that a Lakewood bakery violated the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act by refusing to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple.  At a public hearing today, the commission rejected the bakery’s appeal of an earlier finding of unlawful discrimination by an administrative judge.

David Mullins and Charlie Craig visited Masterpiece Cakeshop in 2012, with Craig’s mother, to order a cake for their upcoming wedding reception.  Mullins and Craig planned to marry in Massachusetts and then celebrate with family and friends back home in Colorado.  Masterpiece owner Jack Phillips informed them that because of his religious beliefs the store’s policy was to deny service to customers who wished to order baked goods to celebrate a same-sex couple’s wedding.

“What should have been a happy day for us turned into a humiliating and dehumanizing experience because of the way we were treated,” said Mullins. “No one should ever have to walk into a store and wonder if they will be turned away just because of who they are.”

Long-standing Colorado state law prohibits public accommodations, including businesses such as Masterpiece Cakeshop, from refusing service based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.  

Last year, an administrative judge upheld the Colorado Civil Rights Division’s finding of illegal discrimination by the bakery.   Today’s decision from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission affirms the prior ruling.  The commission voted unanimously to order a change in policy by the bakery, as well as staff training, and quarterly reporting to confirm that the business does not turn away customers due to sexual orientation.

“Religious freedom is undoubtedly an important American value, but so is the right to be treated equally under the law free from discrimination,” said Amanda C. Goad, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project. “Everyone is free to believe what they want, but businesses like Masterpiece Cakeshop cannot treat some customers differently than others based on who they are as people.”

Phillips admitted he had turned away other same-sex couples as a matter of policy despite Colorado’s law.

“Masterpiece Cakeshop has willfully and repeatedly considered itself above the law when it comes to discriminating against customers, and the Commission has rightly determined otherwise,” said Sara R. Neel, staff attorney with the ACLU of Colorado.

“This law was passed to protect the people of Colorado from experiencing the very same treatment Charlie and David experienced,” said Paula Greisen of King and Griesen LLP, which is representing the couple as cooperating counsel with the ACLU of Colorado. “Everyone who shops in our stores and conducts business in our state should be treated with equality and dignity. That’s what this ruling was about today.”

more on this case

A Douglas County school voucher program that allows taxpayer dollars to flow directly to religious schools is unconstitutional, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado say.

In a brief filed yesterday with the Colorado Supreme Court in the case of LaRue v. Colorado Board of Education, the civil liberties groups assert that the county’s so-called “Choice Scholarship Pilot Program” violates the Colorado Constitution because it subsidizes tuition at private schools with taxpayer dollars.

“Whenever taxpayers are directly subsidizing a religious organization it is plainly unconstitutional,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “That is clearly the case when it comes to Douglas County’s voucher scheme.”

The “scholarship” program offers tuition vouchers worth about $4,600 to 500 students to spend at religious and other private schools. In order to obtain state per-pupil educational funds, Douglas County treats these children as “public school students” attending a charter school that exists only on paper.

In reality, however, the voucher money is spent at district-approved “Private School Partners,” a collection of private schools. As of the filing of the lawsuit, 18 of the 23 approved Private School Partners were religious.

“The Douglas County School District … seeks to divert millions of state taxpayer dollars—which are designated for public elementary and high-school education—to private schools that are owned and operated by churches and other religious organizations,” the brief says. “Most of these schools embed religious instruction in all areas of their curricula. Most of them discriminate based on religion and require attendance at religious services.”

“The Supreme Court’s ruling will not only affect Douglas County’s voucher scheme, but also other districts and government officials who are watching with their own plans to adopt similar unconstitutional diversions of taxpayer dollars to religious organizations,” said ACLU of Colorado Legal Director Mark Silverstein.

The civil liberties groups filed a lawsuit in 2011 on behalf of parents, clergy and taxpayers. A lower court agreed with their position, but the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the voucher program in Feb. 2013.

“The Colorado Constitution was plainly intended to bar any form of tax aid to religious schools,” said Americans United Associate Legal Director Alex J. Luchenitser. “If the Constitution’s framers could know that a Colorado court had upheld this voucher program, they would be rolling over in their graves.”

The case will likely be heard by the Colorado Supreme Court late this year or early next year.

"Parents are free to choose religious education for their children, but the Colorado Constitution forbids taxpayer dollars from paying for that education," said attorney Matthew J. Douglas of the Denver office of Arnold & Porter LLP, who is lead counsel in the case.

The plaintiffs are represented by Douglas, Timothy R. Macdonald, and Michelle K. Albert of Arnold & Porter LLP; Luchenitser and Ayesha N. Khan of Americans United; Heather L. Weaver and Daniel Mach of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief; and Silverstein and Sara Rich of the ACLU of Colorado.

More on this case

(From the ACLU Blog of Rights)