Sotomayor blasts court in scathing dissent on same-sex wedding case

The Hill ^ | 06/30/2023 | ELLA LEE

[ChicagoConservative27]

Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasted the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision to back a Christian wedding website designer’s choice not to provide services to gay couples, calling the decision “profoundly wrong” in a scathing dissenting argument read from the bench.

“Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class,” Sotomayor wrote.

The associate justice harkened back to the civil rights and women’s rights movements in her dissent, suggesting that in recent years, gender and sexual orientation minority groups have faced “backlash to the movement for liberty and equality.”

[Ancesthntr]

“Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class,” Sotomayor wrote.

---

She’s dead wrong. Anyone, or any couple, can go into that cake shop and be served - except they can’t buy a cake or have a website created for them that celebrates a gay wedding. That restriction applies to ALL of the business’ customers, not just the gay ones.

Sotomayer is either completely dense, or she is a hack ideologue, or a bit of both (I pick Door #3).

[Theodore R.]

No, keep her there. Her replacement would be identical. Maybe after 2025, but just maybe

[wgmalabama]

Maybe she will get pissed and quit. Low IQ AA hires at this level are extremely dangerous to our liberties and way of life. I could go as far as to say our very existence.

[Theodore R.]

She was approved with 68 senators. Lindsey Graham backed her!!!

[ro_dreaming]

I thought private businesses had a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Guess that’s gone for the GLBTQIXYZ crowd.

[alstewartfan]

Go after a Mooslim next time!

[simpson96]

Whaddaya expect? She’s another Liberal, Affirmative Action hire.

[liberalh8ter]

Why am I not surprised?

[Chode]

Protected class

i think i see the problem...

[beethovenfan]

The wide Latina speaks.

[NeverTyranny]

No, it is profoundly right.

[Liz]

Stupid Latina can’t see the distinction between
(a) immutable physical characteristics, and,
(b) personal decisions to define one’s life in terms of sexual perversions.

---

Excellent analysis.

[Mr Rogers]

She less bad than the non-woman angry black woman on the bench.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Agreed!

[the OlLine Rebel]

I LOVE how she blows cover by referring to “PROTECTED class”!

So, finally, a lib politico admits publicly they are PROTECTED and special, NOT merely treated equally.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Indeed. In fact, I thought we still see those!

We definitely still see “no shoes…” signs.

And in fact in Baltimore that application got a restaurant in trouble as a poorly dressed black family accused them of racism.

But this begs the question…what is the difference in why they are discriminated against?

[DPMD]

Collectivists. Go figure. Individuals have no value.

[DPMD]

Recent polls indicate sponges are unhappy with the comparison.

[DPMD]

Two and possibly one-half. Had Kavanaugh declared himself a lesbian during the confirmation hearings...

[anton]

I think she should have done a wedding cake with a person getting butt sex with a dog collar and a chain. And, used KY Jelly for icing on a chocolate cake.