科罗拉多州蛋糕店歧视同性恋案

2012年的案子，昨天美国最高法出了判决书。7-2判决科罗拉多州民权委员会对蛋糕店主违反科州反歧视法的裁定无效。

虽然最高法上来就点出了讨论最激烈的问题--蛋糕店主的言论宗教自由 v. 州政府所保护的同性恋者在购买物品或服务时不受歧视的权利， 但是判决完全说的不是这个事儿。反倒是把民权委员会的处理方式拉出来痛批了一通。 民权委员会的委员们彻底把这事儿搞砸了。 最高法认为民权委员会在处理这个案子的时候对蛋糕店主的宗教信仰表现出了敌视, 并且对这个案子的处理和对其他类似案件的处理完全不同。 这种处理方式本身违反了美国第一修正案要求的各州政府不得通过法律限制言论宗教自由。

摘抄一部分判决内容如下：

MASTERPIECE CAKESHOP, LTD. v. COLORADO CIVIL RIGHTS COMM’N

“Nevertheless, while those religious and philosophical objections are protected, it is a general rule that such objections do not allow business owners and other actors in the economy and in society to deny protected persons equal access to goods and services under a neutral and generally applicable public accommodations law.

...

The neutral and respectful consideration to which Phillips was entitled was compromised here, however. The Civil Rights Commission’s treatment of his case has some elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs that motivated his objection.

...

On this occasion another commissioner made specific reference to the previous meeting’s discussion but said far more to disparage Phillips’ beliefs. The commissioner stated:

“I would also like to reiterate what we said in the hearing or the last meeting. Freedom of religion and religion has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the holocaust, whether it be—I mean, we—we can list hundreds of situations where freedom of religion has been used to justify discrimination.And to me it is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use to—to use their religion to hurt others.” 

...

For the reasons just described, the Commission’s treatment of Phillips’ case violated the State’s duty under the First Amendment not to base laws or regulations on hostility to a religion or religious viewpoint.

...

​Commission was obliged under the Free Exercise Clause to proceed in a manner neutral toward and tolerant of Phillips’ religious beliefs.​”