A group of chefs, bakers and restaurateurs have come together to stand up against a bakery that refused to supply a cake for a same-sex wedding.
The United States Supreme Court is set to hear the case between the Masterpiece Cake Shop and the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. In 2012, baker Jack Phillips David Mullins and Charlie Craig, who requested a rainbow layer cake for their wedding reception.
Phillips maintains that Christian bakers should be allowed to choose who they cater to on the grounds of “religious” and “artistic” freedom.
A group of 222 chefs from around the US—known as Amici—have that outlines why chefs cannot refuse to serve some customers and not others.
The Amici group includes celebrity chefs including Anthony Bourdain (No Reservations), Christina Tosi (Momofuku Milk Bar) and Carla Hall (The Chew).
The brief—filed by the Human Rights Commission—outlines why public accommodation laws do not impinge on a chef’s creativity.
“Chefs retain discretion to choose the cuisine they prepare and the menu items and services they offer,” the brief reads.
“Anti-discrimination laws merely demand that chefs and others treat all customers equally: what is offered to some must be offered to all.”
“Such a sweeping exemption from public accommodation laws would upend anti- discrimination norms accepted throughout the country, to the detriment of historically disfavoured minority groups—including, as here, same-sex couples.”
The brief continues to say that anti-discrimination laws don’t require “a vegan chef to serve meat, or a kosher restaurant to offer a shellfish item”.
“No such law would compel a baker to offer a flavor or appliqué he did not wish to use. And if a baker chooses, as a general matter, not to write messages on his creations, a public accommodation law would not compel him to do so in order to comply with non-discrimination requirements.
“Rather, public accommodation laws simply mandate equal access. When a chef or other culinary artist offers an item or service for sale, he must offer it to all customers. That anti-discrimination obligation is neither surprising nor burdensome.”
The Trump administration has spoken out in support of Phillips in a brief filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ).
“Forcing Phillips to create expression for and participate in a ceremony that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs invades his First Amendment rights,” .
The case is set to be heard in the Supreme Court this December.
