Page 619 - Baker News Today

The time same-sex marriage was not legal in colorado. and so, perhaps, it was more reasonable for the baker to think he was within his rights to refuse serve these customers. >> harris: that is interesting. moving forward now things have changed. >> correct. >> harris: what do you think will happen if this comes up again? i understand the narrow scope of it. but where does this case sit terms of informing the public moving forward? >> i think it will be very difficult for the courto give some so...

Were exempt or never were exempt. they could have said that people who were engaged in expressive activity like weddinge dec traitors and photograph -- reck -- decorators and photographs had an obligation or never had an option to engage with the same-sex weddings. the court dodged the question and said on these particular facts here in colorado, the colorado civil rights commission acted in such a way that seemed to telegraph a look of respect for the sincere religious views of this one baker. ...

The freedom caucus, mark meadows, he is taken as hostage, a farm bill. if they dont have an agreement, he will shoot that hostage. the farm bill is supposed to come up for a vote later this month. thats it for that. and then theres questions about the leadership. remember paul ryan is supposed to retire at the end of the year. people will ask questions if they failed on immigration and ed on the farm bill, why is he still the speaker? does kevin mccarthy have the juice in all of those questions ...

This bakers home state treated him unfairl the opinion saying "when the nsiders thist did notn do so with the religious requires.y that the constitution i spoke with an attorney who argued this case on behalf of that colorado baker and as you t imagine, he sounded thrilled. decision protecting jackh the phillips rights and religious les of this country founded upon. justice kennedyas held that tolerance is a two-way street and jack phillips was not tolerated by the civil rights commission of col...

For your gay wedding. you see the civil rights commission, the different groups getting involved and filing lawsuits. its a form of legal terrorism in some ways to continue to push an agenda rather than a solutio solution. im going to go to your point. i want the people to resolve it, more libertarian approach under the constitution rather than frankly spending all this time in litigation. >> kennedy: and through the free market and not the court. >> david: go to another baker in less you have a...

Time and again if it comes to this, jack phillips, the baker, i will not make cakes for same sex couples. so they could protest that and drive this all the way up. >> correct. it will depend on how the colorado commissioners treat him. will they have read this opinion. presumably they will. will they be aware of the attitude about neutrality as opposed to hostility. >> neil: how did steven breyer and kagan went along with the conservative majority? >> this seems like a classic chief justice john...

It be narrow 7-2 vote? on very narrow grounds deciding that the baker of denver should prevail only because of t way his specific case was handled in colorado. the justices said in their majority opinion they didnt give his religious views serious enough attention. for that reason the finding in his case was defective. colorado has a human rights law, you cant discriminate on sexual orientation. two men went in and asked for a cake to celebrate their wedding was turned down. they sued and they f...

Has two components. freedom of religion and freedom of expression. this was primarily a freedom of expression case. what the baker said is, my cakes are works of art. they express a view. and by forcing know bakeme to be for something i disagree with youre vile violating my freedom of expression. so there, arguments about is a cake expression. all the weddings ive been to a cake never says anything and the couple never got into discussing how this cake would look. as soon as they said what they ...

Example and illustration of his intent and thinking. >> ben wittes, thank you very much. i want to leave our viewers with thing. my colleague chuck todd tweeted this today. i think it is a good thing to chew over. this was in response to the president saying that he can pardon himself at any time. does anyone think for one second that the founders ever thought the head of the executive was or should be above the law? to think we may actually have to pass a constitutional amendment to declare tha...

Future, the cases will be coming, the religious claims. >> pete williams from the high court there. pete, thanks as always for helping breat down. danny savalas, danny, almost sounds like pete is saying the baker here in this particular case did not necessarily win because of the merits of his argument but more based op technicality? >> i wouldnt call it a tech t technicality. avoid deciding constitutional issues they dont have to decide. in this case, they looked how the colorado human rights a...