A California baker who refused to create a cake for a lesbian couple’s wedding by citing her Christian views was successful in her case.
After a protracted legal struggle, Cathy Miller, the owner of Tastries Bakery in Bakersfield, California, revealed on Saturday that a Kern County court had decided in her favor.
In 2017, Miller declined to prepare a cake for the wedding of a lesbian couple, Eileen and Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio, citing her religious convictions as justification.
The baker apparently politely declined to prepare the cake and provided the couple with the name of an other shop at that time.
The bakery said on Facebook, “Thank you Tastries friends and family.
“Judge Eric Bradshaw decided in favor of Cathy Miller yesterday after careful deliberation and examination of the facts surrounding the Cathy’s Creations and Tastries Bakery discrimination case,” the tweet added.
We value your prayers and encouragement as we gladly do business with you in the future.
The result in a California courtroom was hailed as a “First Amendment triumph” by the Thomas More Society, whose attorneys defended the lady.
According to its website, the company is a “Chicago-based conservative Roman Catholic public-interest legal practice.”
Charles LiMandri, special counsel for the Thomas More Society, stated, “We congratulate the court for this ruling.”
The United States Supreme Court has always supported the freedom of creative expression, and the First Amendment guarantees everyone the right to practice their faith freely.
The California Department of Fair Housing and Employment has filed several discrimination lawsuits in accordance with the Unruh Civil Rights Act.
According to a second attorney with the Thomas More Society, the decision is proper for the lady and the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of religion.
It is ironic, according to Paul Jonna, Special Counsel for the Thomas More Society, that Cathy was subjected to discrimination because of her religious convictions despite a legislation that was designed to shield people from such behavior.
Jonna referred to Miller’s conviction that a marriage must be between one man and one woman by saying, “Cathy believes in the Bible.”
The Thomas More Society included a deposition from February that they considered “disturbing,” in which prosecutors seemed to doubt Miller’s religious views.
Anthony Mann, an attorney of the California Department of Fair Housing and Employment, inquires, “Do you attempt to follow all that the Bible says?”
Miller said in his testimony, “I do my best, but I’m a sinner, but I do my best.”
Mann asked, “Do you adhere to any of the dietary laws from the Old Testament, such as avoiding eating pigs or shellfish, etc.?”
The Thomas More Society’s attorneys said that they believed this to be a blatant breach of her rights.
The genuineness of Cathy’s beliefs was genuinely being questioned by the state, according to Jonna.
“Almost as upsetting as quibbling about her identity as an artist is the fact that they brought Miller’s open and truly held ideas into doubt,” the attorney stated.
Judge Bradshaw said in his ruling that Miller’s main objective was to behave in accordance with her true Christian convictions about what the Bible teaches regarding marriage.
The court said, “That motive was not irrational or arbitrarily chosen, nor did it stress irrelevant distinctions or support stereotypes.”
Additionally, Bradshaw said that making cakes is still a kind of “pure communication” that is based in aesthetic expression.
According to Bradshaw, “Defendants’ pure and expressive speech is entitled to protection under the First Amendment.”
After the court announced the decision on Friday, Eileen Rodriguez-Del Rio stated, “Of course we’re unhappy, but not unexpected.”
We expect a different outcome from our appeal, the lady stated.
Miller admitted to a local news source in 2017 that she hadn’t intended to be discriminatory but that being asked to prepare a different cake would go against her personal beliefs.
All of us at Tastries are loved. Since my husband and I are Christians and believe that God created everyone equally, it is not that we dislike members of certain groups; rather, there are some things that offend my conscience.
The lady also said that she would have been open to selling a pre-made cake to a couple of the same sex.
But the line was drawn at the point of creating and constructing a cake.
On Facebook, Tastries, which has close to 10,000 fans, got hundreds of comments on a post they published on Saturday.
The majority of comments seemed to be in favor of Miller and Bradshaw’s decision.
“Glorify God! One of His followers prayed for continued protection over you.
Another person commented, “Fervent prayers answered.”
Nevertheless, not everyone agreed with Bradshaw’s position.
One participant, who looked to be outraged by the judge’s judgment, said, “You are not Christians.”
The commenter said, “You propagate a message of hatred, you are not Christian, and you are wicked in disguise.”
Miller and Tastries have prior legal difficulties.
2018 saw Superior Court Judge David Lampe rule in Miller’s favor, declaring that baking cakes constituted a “artistic expression” and did not infringe on anti-discrimination legislation in California.
The court said in his eight-page decision that “a wedding cake is not merely a cake in a free speech analysis.”
‘It is to be used historically as a centerpiece in the celebration of a marriage. It is an artistic statement by the individual producing it. There is no more expressive behavior than this.
After trying to purchase a cake from Miller’s bakery for their wedding in October 2017, same-sex couple Eileen and Mireya Rodriquez-Del Rio filed a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing.
Because the couple had not requested any statements or messages to be written on the cake, the state claimed that the First Amendment did not apply and granted the couple’s request. They gave Miller the mandate to build the cake.
Judge Lampe, however, overturned the decision and stated that his choice was made because Miller had not yet made the cake.
If the cake was already on display at the store and Miller had refused to allow the couple to purchase it, the man claimed that this would have constituted discrimination.
In 2018, Judge Lampe said, “A retail tire business may not refuse to sell a tire because the proprietor does not wish to sell tires to same sex couples.”
No baker is allowed to start their business, exhibit their products in a visible area, and then turn away customers on the basis of their ethnicity, religion, gender, or gender identity.
Since Miller doesn’t “condone same sex weddings and would have no involvement in this process,” Eileen Rodriquez-Del Rio said Miller informed them she would accept their order but give it to another bakery to prepare.