Baker in Colorado wants Supreme Court to allow him to discriminate

SHARE Baker in Colorado wants Supreme Court to allow him to discriminate
856594714_71671415.jpg

Sunrise behind the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. The high court will hear oral arguments Tuesday in the case of the Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. | Mark Wilson/Getty Images

“We don’t serve your kind here.”

You don’t expect to see a sign with those words displayed in Illinois in 2017. That’s because, consistent with our values of fairness and freedom, Illinois has a robust Human Rights Act that bans discrimination by restaurants, hotels and other entities that serve the public. And, since 2006, that Human Rights Act has protected lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) people from far-reaching discrimination. In short, you can’t be a business that claims to be open to all and then bar the door to LGBTQ people.

Yet, a case at the nation’s highest court could create a license to discriminate and dismantle civil rights protections for LGBTQ people across the country, including here in Illinois. Furthermore, it could eviscerate our country’s civil rights protections going back decades and leave the door open to a return to rampant discrimination against African-Americans, women and a myriad of other Americans.

Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case from Colorado that could result in the justices creating a license to discriminate against same-sex couples. And that hurts Illinoisans.

OPINION

The key question at hand: Whether the owner of a bakery who refused to bake a wedding cake, which he calls his “art,” for a same-sex couple must follow the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act that applies to public places like hotels, restaurants, bars and bakeries. If the Supreme Court creates that right to refuse, the decision could have far-ranging impacts on LGBTQ people in Illinois.

Charlie Craig and David Mullins at home in Denver. A Denver-area baker, Jack Phillips, cited his Christian faith in refusing to make a cake for the gay couple’s wedding celebration in 2012. | David Zalubowski/AP

Charlie Craig and David Mullins at home in Denver. A Denver-area baker, Jack Phillips, cited his Christian faith in refusing to make a cake for the gay couple’s wedding celebration in 2012. | David Zalubowski/AP

The Illinois Human Rights Act is similar to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act. Both protect many people — including LGBTQ people — from discrimination in places of public accommodations.

Those who support the bakery owner claim that the state should grant him a right to discriminate based on his religious beliefs. The First Amendment already protects the owner’s freedom to practice his religion. What the bakery owner seeks is broader and more dangerous: a free pass to discriminate against LGBTQ people, or really any group of people, so long as he can claim his desire to discriminate stems from his religious beliefs.

But this is not just about a wedding cake. Anti-LGBTQ discrimination would be legal, from cradle to grave. A hotel in Danville could turn away a gay couple. A restaurant in Rockford could refuse to serve a lesbian couple. A hospital in Moline could prevent a same-sex partner from visiting their loved one. A paramedic in Edwardsville could refuse to provide life-saving care. And a funeral home in Oak Park could refuse to prepare the body of a gay man for burial. We already see some of these actions happening in states without anti-discrimination protections.

In fact, a same-sex couple was turned away from a bed and breakfast in Paxton, Illinois, in 2011 because the owner refused to host their civil union ceremony. When the couple filed a complaint with the Illinois Human Rights Commission, state law protected them, and the inn was sanctioned and faces $80,000 in penalties.

Depending on the Supreme Court’s decision, such protections could disappear and discriminatory behavior could soon be legal in states with anti-discrimination laws, like Illinois. This is not what Illinoisans want.

Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips decorates a cake inside his store in Lakewood, Colorado, in 2014. Citing religious beliefs and calling his work “art,” he refused to make a cake for a gay couple. | Brennan Linsley/AP file

Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips decorates a cake inside his store in Lakewood, Colorado, in 2014. Citing religious beliefs and calling his work “art,” he refused to make a cake for a gay couple. | Brennan Linsley/AP file

We want a state where all people — including LGBTQ people — are equally welcomed in public spaces across the state. The court’s decision could further lead to the dismantling of our civil rights law for everyone. Once the door is cracked open against LGBTQ people, anti-equality attorneys, plaintiffs and organizations will bring case after case to shove the door of discrimination wide open. The court’s decision could open the door to legal discrimination against people based on race, religion, gender, age, disability status and other protected categories.

What can we do? We at Equality Illinois are educating and urging our elected officials to aggressively support our anti-discrimination laws and ensure we keep building a better Illinois. For instance, on Wednesday night, a forum on LGBTQ issues will be held with Democratic gubernatorial candidates at Chicago’s Second Presbyterian Church, when LGBTQ people and allies are going to push the candidates to tell us how they will make the lives of LGBTQ people in Illinois better.

We hope the Supreme Court will take the side of justice and fairness and preserve those laws that have advanced dignity and justice for historically marginalized communities. Either way, we will continue to fight anti-LGBTQ discrimination with the tools available to us and defend the values that make Illinois a welcoming state for all people. We will fight for fairness, inclusion, and the freedom to be who you are without burden or discrimination.

Brian C. Johnson is CEO of Equality Illinois, the state’s LGBTQ civil rights organization.

Send letters to: letters@suntimes.com

The Latest
Despite the addition of some new characters (human and otherwise) the film comes across as a relatively uninspired and fairly forgettable chapter in the Monsterverse saga.
Unite Here Local 1, representing the workers at the Signature Room and its lounge, said in a lawsuit in October the employer failed to give 60 days notice of a closing or mass layoff, violating state law.
Uecker has been synonymous with Milwaukee baseball for over half a century.
Doctors say looking at the April 8 eclipse without approved solar glasses — which are many times darker than sunglasses — can lead to retinal burns and can result in blind spots and permanent vision loss.
Antoine Perteet, 33, targeted victims on the dating app Grindr, according to Chicago police.