how you would rule in this case
ANSWER
In the hypothetical situation, a florist turned down the opportunity to create floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding because of her Christian convictions. The main legal issue is whether or not a state can require that establishments open to the public provide “full and equal” services to clients without taking their sexual orientation into account. As a member of the U.S. Supreme Court, I base my conclusion on thoroughly examining the pertinent constitutional concepts and case law, especially those about the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause and the idea of public accommodation.
The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment guarantees a person’s freedom to exercise their religion without interference from the state. The freedom to hold and practice one’s religion is guaranteed by this provision. This right must be weighed against other significant community interests because it is not unalienable.
Public accommodations allude to the idea that establishments accessible to the general public are not permitted to discriminate against their patrons based on certain protected traits, such as race, religion, or, in some situations, sexual orientation. This rule intends to encourage equitable access and stop unfair discrimination in public spaces for business.
The florist’s exercise of her religious convictions and the idea of public accommodation are at odds in this situation. The florist claims that making flower designs for a same-sex wedding would go against her religious convictions. The gay couple, conversely, claims that they are being refused equal access to services because of their sexual orientation, which raises questions about discrimination.
I would use the legal framework provided by the Supreme Court to resolve this disagreement, especially the guidelines established in the 2018 case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. In this case, the baker successfully got his request to refuse to make a special wedding cake for same-sex marriage because of his religious convictions. The Court’s ruling was founded on the idea that the state commission had shown hostility against the baker’s beliefs and violated his right to exercise his religion.
I would evaluate whether the state’s actions in ordering the florist to provide services for the homosexual couple’s wedding were impartial and respectful of her religious beliefs by applying the Masterpiece ruling. The florist’s First Amendment rights might have been violated if the state’s actions showed prejudice towards or unequal treatment of her religious beliefs. However, the principle of public accommodation might take precedence to assure equal access and avoid discrimination if the state’s obligation was enforced uniformly and impartially to all companies, regardless of their religious affiliations.
The specifics of the case, the degree of governmental neutrality towards the florist’s religious beliefs, and the larger societal interests in promoting equal access and preventing discrimination in public accommodations would all influence my decision as a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. It would be essential to strike a balance between the rights guaranteed by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and the ideas of public accommodation to make a fair and constitutionally sound decision.
QUESTION
Description
“If you’re going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you’re not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you’re probably doing something wrong.” Justice Antonin Scalia
Former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia, in the above statement, has depicted the dilemma that federal judges are faced with when deciding on whether an act, law or executive is constitutional. This task seems reasonable and attainable; however, as advocates of the Constitution, the Supreme Court Justices are held to a certain standard when given the task of safeguarding the Constitution. Similar to the president, justices of the Supreme Court must make their decisions based on the facts and laws of the case, while putting aside any personal attachments or feelings regarding the morality of their choice. So, for this week’s discussion post, I would like you to take a look at the hypothetical below and tell me how you would conclude if you were a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Hypothetical #1
A florist has refused to provide floral arrangements for a gay couple’s wedding because of her Christian beliefs. Can astate require that businesses open to the public provide “full and equal” services to customers without regard to their sexual orientation? Please discuss how you would rule in this case. Remember to incorporate terms/concepts from this week’s module.
Fill in the order form and submit all your files, including instructions, rubrics, and other information given to you by your instructor.
Once you complete filling the forms, complete your payment. We will get the order and assign it to a writer.
When your order is completed, it’s assigned to an editor for approval. The editor approves the order.
Once approved, we will upload the order to your account for you to download. You can rate your writer or give your customer review.
