Switch to ADA Accessible Website
Orlando Criminal Lawyer

How Can We Weigh Civil Rights With Religious Rights?


We’ve previously discussed the importance of one particular civil rights case that was recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court: Unfortunately, on June 4th, the Court made a decision that is arguably antithetical to the protection of civil rights when it decided that a cake shop owner who refused to bake a cake for a homosexual couple had his free exercise clause rights denied when the state civil rights commission decided that he engaged in discrimination.

The U.S.—like other countries—has a dark history when it comes to discrimination; whether that involves discrimination based on skin color, gender, religion, etc. Below, we discuss this issue of balancing “religious” versus “civil” rights, and why civil rights should arguably outweigh religious rights.

What Equal Protection Means

As Justice Ginsburg wrote in her dissenting opinion in this case, religious (and philosophical, for that matter) objections do not allow business owners and others to deny protected individuals equal access to goods and services under public accommodations laws. States can protect homosexual individuals, just as they can protect other classes of people, in ensuring that products and services are offered on the same terms and conditions as they are to other members of the public. Business owners placing signs up indicating that they will not provide goods or services to homosexual individuals due to religious or other reasons are violating the law, and subject these individuals to “indignities” when they seek goods and services in an open market.

In this case, the majority concluded that the cake shop owner’s religious objection was not properly considered with the “neutrality that the Free Exercise Clause requires,” and the state civil rights commission exhibited “hostility” towards the owner’s religion. However, Ginsburg pointed out that there was no evidence of hostility to religion that the Court has previously required in order to find a free-exercise violation.

Distinguishing Free Exercise from Outright Discrimination

Of particular importance to Ginsburg was the fact that this couple simply requested a wedding cake, and made no mention of any messaging or anything else being included on the cake which would distinguish it (in terms of messaging, speech, religion, etc.) from any other cake that would be sold by the business owner. In other words, in this case, the business owner would not sell to the couple “for no reason other than their sexual orientation.” The state in this case—as in many other states—prohibits precisely the discrimination that this couple encountered.

Florida Civil Rights Attorneys

Treating people differently—and denying them goods or services—based on sexual orientation is illegal. If your civil rights have been violated, contact us today at the Baez Law Firm to find out how we can help.




  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Miami Office

1200 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1410
Miami, FL 33131
Office: 305-999-5100
Fax: 305-999-5111

Orlando Office

250 N Orange Ave, Suite 750
Orlando, FL 32801
Office: 407-705-2626
Fax: 407-705-2625

Email Us

Fields Marked * Are required

DISCLAIMER: Completing and submitting this form or otherwise merely contacting The Baez Law Firm or any individual at the firm will not establish an attorney/client relationship. Our firm cannot represent you until we determine that there would be no conflict of interest and that we are otherwise able to accept representation of your case. Please do not send any information or documents until a formal attorney/client relationship has been established through an interview with an attorney and you have been given authorization in the form of an engagement letter with The Baez Law Firm. Any information or documents sent via this form or otherwise prior to your receipt of an engagement letter will not be treated as confidences, secrets, or protected information of any nature. Submitting information regarding your potential case will not bar The Baez Law Firm from representing or continuing to represent a person or entity whose interest are adverse to your in condition with your case.

protected by reCAPTCHA Privacy - Terms
Please review the highlighted fields. They are required.
DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.
MileMark Media - Practice Growth Solutions

© 2015 - 2024 Baez Law Firm. All rights reserved.
This law firm website and legal marketing are managed by MileMark Media.

Contact Form Tab Contact Form Tab