Document Type
Brief
Publication Date
10-30-2017
Abstract
Amici are legal scholars with expertise in the historical and contemporary applications of the public accommodation laws. This brief argues that the First Amendment exemption Masterpiece claims would subvert the historic purpose of these laws: to promote equal dignity in the marketplace.
For more than half a century, state public accommodation laws across the country have protected against denials of dignity and equal treatment in the public marketplace. Throughout that period, this Court has consistently rejected arguments that businesses open to the general public have a constitutional right to provide less than the full and equal services required by such laws.
Granting Masterpiece an exemption from Colorado's requirement of equal service would deprive same-sex couples of "protections taken for granted by most people either because they already have them or do not need them." Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620, 631 (1996). Nothing in this Court's jurisprudence supports the conclusion that such a deprivation of equal dignity is constitutionally required.
Recommended Citation
Bagenstos, Samuel, "Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission: Brief of Amici Curiae Public Accommodation Law Scholars in Support of Respondents" (2017). Appellate Briefs. 31.
https://repository.law.umich.edu/briefs/31
Included in
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, First Amendment Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons
Comments
Amicus: Sepper, Professor Elizabeth; Bagenstos, Professor Samuel; Millard, Professor Frank G.; Hunter, Professor Nan D.; Oleske, Professor James; Singer, Professor Joseph William