RUFKM? Judge orders Colorado Cake Maker to serve gay couples

[MarkCO]

It has been fought in court. He lost. This has been all over the legal blogs -- mainly about how the ACLU chose the wrong side of the fight.

That is not true either. The order was from an administrative judge in Colorado's Civil Rights Commission, not a court. He has the right to appeal and or take his issue to a court if he so chooses. I've testified in front of Administrative law judges, and while it has some of the trappings of a trial, there are some limitations.

[asmo]

That is not true either. The order was from an administrative judge in Colorado's Civil Rights Commission, not a court. He has the right to appeal and or take his issue to a court if he so chooses. I've testified in front of Administrative law judges, and while it has some of the trappings of a trial, there are some limitations.

Was trying not to get into this but this is not the first time this has happened. Wedding photographers, other bakers, wedding planners, and wedding locations (go find things like Elane Photography v. Willock, etc.) have all been targeted by a few idiots with chips on their shoulders and an agenda. The various cases have been going through various stages of court proceedings -- all coming with the same outcomes, all relying on anti-discrimination laws of the 50-70s as their fundamental basis - bolstered by various individual state laws.. The reason why it was an administrative law judge that ruled in this case was due to state law that is being claimed to be violated here (and the infancy of this particular case) - Colorado law prohibits places of public accommodation from discriminating on the basis of, among other things, sexual orientation. If you allow the public into your place of business - or are providing a service to the general public (individually or en masse) then you are a place of public accommodation.

Go read the ACLU briefs, they are quite insane in that it shows just how far out of whack we really are when it comes to 'free markets'.. then go read Employment Division v. Smith and see why the various 'bigots' in these cases are loosing.

The ruling on the Hobby Lobby case by SCOTUS is going to have some impact here since they are all arguing on the same basic grounds: First amendment free exercise protections.. Its not an exact match-up, but there will be some interesting fall out from it as it applies to the cases like the ones above.

[CO Hugh]

That is not true either. The order was from an administrative judge in Colorado's Civil Rights Commission, not a court. He has the right to appeal and or take his issue to a court if he so chooses. I've testified in front of Administrative law judges, and while it has some of the trappings of a trial, there are some limitations.

I worked at AG's many moons ago and the ALJs were called pretend court, which it is. I also once served on he Civil Rights a Commission, an agency in search of a problem if there ever was one. Meetings a tremendous waste of time, searching for how people' feelings were hurt.

Can only be worse now.