An appeals court in California ruled a Kern County baker violated the rights of a gay couple when she refused on religious grounds to bake a cake for their wedding, Cal Matters reports.
The case started in August of 2017 when Eileen and Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio visited Tastries Bakery in Bakersfield to purchase a cake for the upcoming wedding. According to court documents, the couple were helped by staff and chose a pre-designed cake with “three tiers with white buttercream frosting without any writing, symbols, engravings, images or toppers.” Staff told the couple it was a popular choice for “birthdays, baby showers, weddings, and quinceaneras,” but then refused to sell the prepare or sell the cake when they learned it was for their same-sex wedding.
California’s Civil Rights Division filed suit against Tastries and its owner, Catharine Miller, in 2018.
Tastries Bakery has 18 employees and is owned by Catharine Miller, a devout Christian.
The case rests in large measure on whether the cake in question is a generic item or a custom creation. The state and the Rodriguez-Del Rios claim that it is generic, while Tastries considers the cake to be a custom creation.
Tastries “sells a variety of baked goods, which are available daily in a display case and can be purchased by anyone without restriction.” The display case can also accommodate “single-tiered cakes that are meant for last-minute purchasing.” All other cakes, including the generic three-tiered cake ordered by the Rodriguez-Del Rios, must be pre-ordered.
“Tastries’s policy is that all preordered baked goods are considered “custom,” regardless of the type of product or its design specifications. If a customer wants a cake identical to one in the daily display case, but wants the cake prepared for a specific date, it is considered by Tastries to be a ‘custom’ cake.”
A lower court agreed with Miller and Tastries, noting Miller referred the couple to another bakery that would meet their request and that the couple were able to find a similar cake for their wedding.
The ruling issued this week found the lower court erred and sided with the state and the Rodriguez-Del Rios.
“Application of the policy here pivots upon the sexual orientation of the end user – the policy cannot apply or operate until the same-sex status of the couple is identified. Despite that the underlying rationale for the policy is rooted in a sincerely held religious belief about marriage, held in good faith without ill will or malice, the policy nonetheless requires a distinction in service that is based solely on, and because of, the end users’ sexual orientation. The relevant and undisputed facts about the policy and its application here necessarily establish intentional discrimination.”
Miller’s attorneys at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty told Cal Matters they will appeal the ruling and take their fight to the U.S. Supreme Court.
