Originally Posted by
striker42
If I had to make a prediction about the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, I'll predict that the court will decide the case on the artistic argument rather than the religious argument. There's far more precedent about expression out there than there is about free exercise.
Anyone who thinks making a custom cake like this is not an artistic expression needs to go watch some more food network. It would be simple for the court to hold that the first amendment prevents the government from mandating people create works of artistic expression and since this cake was "artistic expression", the public accommodations law violated this individual's first amendment rights. I think it's possible that you could get a liberal justice to join with a decision like this (unlikely because of the complete lack of intellectual honesty that infests both sides of the court).
The problem with a holding like this is one of definitions. It opens up the question of what "artistic expression" is. Could a Subway "sandwich artist" claim artistic expression in the creation of a sub?
It also just kicks the issue further down the road. If you don't address the issue of free exercise, you'll eventually see the case of a for profit wedding venue refusing to host a gay wedding make its way to the SCOTUS.
But the high court has never been shy about offloading the heavy lifting of coming up with definitions onto the lower courts and loves punting on hot button issues. So I think the case will be decided based on freedom of expression/speech grounds.