In an argument Tuesday over the case of a Colorado baker who refuses to make wedding cakes for a gay couple, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court seemed firmly divided on whether queer people or religious straight people should have easier access to cakes.
While Justice Anthony “Swing Vote” Kennedy vacillated between calling the baker’s decision an “affront” to queer people and sympathizing with his religious beliefs, the court’s liberal justices emitted various forms of “hell no.”
Justice Sonia “Side-Eye” Sotomayor asked snarkily, “When have we ever given protection to a food,” whereas Justice Stephen “No Nonsense” Breyer asked, “Where is the line?”
In response to Breyer, a lawyer for the baker, Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, and a lawyer for the Trump administration both said that it would be harder to justify religious discrimination against interracial couples. But this just made it even more painfully obvious that this case was not about religion at all and that it was completely about relegating queer people to second class citizenship. Justice David “We Are the World” Cole even explicitly said as much.
But Chief Justice John G. “Hetero Oppressor” Roberts Jr., who famously dissented in the Court’s 2015 ruling on same-sex marriage, said the court had anticipated that cases like this would arise. He seemed to refer to people like the homophobic baker as “decent and honorable people.”
And after all that, none of these justices were able to come to any sort of agreement. But can we all at least agree that the name of the case, “Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission,” sounds like a Wes Anderson movie?