In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Human Rights Commission, the Supreme Court faces a choice between two very different visions of American civil society. The state of Colorado and a same-sex couple, Charlie Craig and David Mullins, who are being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, propose a new reading of public accommodation laws that will treat opposition to or mere failure to support same-sex marriage as ipso facto sexual-orientation discrimination.

Censorship is like poison gas: a powerful weapon that can harm you when the wind shifts. Freedom of expression for ourselves requires freedom of expression for others. It is at the very heart of our democracy.

The implications of this case go far beyond cake artists, florists, photographers, and other wedding vendors.

The two competing visions of America that are presented by Jack Phillips and the Respondents would yield starkly different outcomes. The Constitution and the Supreme Court’s own precedents deeply respect the freedoms of all, even those whose opinions are the least popular.

Read the full article on Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Human Rights Commission by John Malcolm and Emilie Kao at The Heritage Foundation