1
Research Paper: Religious Liberty
Jane Davis
School of Helms Government, Liberty University
GOVT 421_D01
Dr. James Crawford
August 16, 2024
2
Research Paper: Religious Liberty
The rulings of the Supreme Court in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights
Commission (2018) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) demonstrate the complex relationship
between religious liberty and the pursuit of legal equality. This research explores these cases and
analyzes how they reflect the evolving landscape of American constitutional and religious
history, therefore addressing this relationship. Examining the Court's interpretations of every
case helps us to see how opinions about individual liberties and the government's responsibility
in preserving them have evolved. Moreover, this research takes into account the broader
implications of these decisions for the modern society by focusing on ongoing debate on the
meaning of equality, the relationship between religion and law, and the limits of individual
liberty.
Case Analysis
Obergefell v. Hodeges
The 2015 case of Obergefell v. Hodges had a significant impact on the legal framework
regarding marriages in the United States (Obergefell V. Hodges, 2015). The case centered around
the question of whether the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses
extended to same-sex couples the right to marry (Pelts, 2014). The plaintiffs, who initiated a
collection of cases in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, challenged the state restrictions
on same-sex marriage and the lack of recognition of marriages that were held outside the state
(Pelts, 2014). The involvement of the Supreme Court was necessary when there were conflicting
decisions in the lower courts that were in disagreement with each other.
3
The central question in Obergefell was whether the Fourteenth Amendment required
states to license same-sex marriages and recognize same-sex marriages performed lawfully in
other states. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to marry is a fundamental
liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause, and that denying it to same-sex couples violated
the Equal Protection Clause (Obergefell V. Hodges, 2015). The Court stressed marriage's
importance as a foundation of the nation's social order, as well as individuals' freedom to create
their own identity through marriage.
In their dissenting opinion, Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito argued that the
definition of marriage should be placed under the jurisdiction of the states and that the Supreme
Court had overstepped the constitutionally mandated scope of its authority (Obergefell V.
Hodges, 2015.). They argued that the decision made by the Court was a legislative act that
should have been left to the political process.
The Court's ruling in Obergefell was a defining turning point in the evolution of marriage
equality. By affirming same-sex couples' basic right to marry, the Court upheld the principle of
equal legal protection. This judgment not only granted civil rights to same-sex individuals, but it
also challenged traditional views of family and gender roles.
Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission
Masterpiece Cakeshop featured a conflict between a same-sex couple wanting to book a
custom wedding cake for their ceremony and a Colorado bakery owner. The owner of the bakery
refused to make a cake for the couple, claiming religious objections to marriages between people
of the same gender (Masterpiece Cake Shop V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 2018). The
4
case raised the fundamental legal question of whether forcing the bakery owner to create a cake
violated his First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.
The hostile environment created by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission throughout
the administrative proceedings was the main focus of the majority opinion of the Supreme Court,
while also acknowledging the importance of religious liberty. The Court came to the conclusion
that the acts taken by the Commission demonstrated anti-religious bias, which therefore hindered
the capacity of the bakery owner to obtain access to a decisionmaker who was impartial
(Masterpiece Cake Shop V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 2018).
Ginsburg and Kagan, two justices who opposed the majority opinion, argued that the
issue should have been determined based on the question of whether or not the baker's refusal to
serve couples of the same gender constituted discrimination (Masterpiece Cake Shop V.
Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 2018). In their argument, they argued that the Court's
emphasis on the behavior of the Commission was inappropriate and that the matter needed to
have been settled primarily on the implementation of the anti-discrimination law.
The opinion that was in disagreement with the majority position claimed that the
Supreme Court needed to have addressed the more general constitutional question of whether or
not compelled expressive conduct violated the First Amendment (Masterpiece Cake Shop V.
Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 2018). In the majority of the court’s opinion, Justice
Gorsuch argued that the government has no authority to compel individuals to produce messages
that are in direct opposition to their personal beliefs.
Analysis of Cases in the Constitutional and Religious Liberty History
5
Constitutional and Religious Liberty in Historical Perspective
The United States has a complex and evolving history in balancing religious freedom
with the goal of equality. Though the First Amendment guarantees the right to freely practice
religion, the nation has struggled to balance these liberties with conflicting social interests
(McClellan, 1989). The Fourteenth Amendment introduced the Due Process and Equal
Protection Clauses, therefore extending individual freedoms. Civil rights for many vulnerable
groups, including African Americans, women, and more recently, LGBTQ+ individuals, have
been much improved by these clauses (Chang, 2020). But the employment of these clauses has
sometimes been challenged, especially when they interact with assertions of religious liberty.
Growing conflict between these two basic liberties emerged in the 20th century. While
rulings like Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) confirmed religious liberty, historic cases including
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and Roe v. Wade (1973) extended human rights protections
(K. L. Hall, 2002). These rulings exposed the difficulty of balancing opposing constitutional
values. This historical setting fits Obergefell v. Hodges and Masterpiece Cake Shop. They mark
the most recent chapter in an ongoing discussion on the range of personal liberties and the
function of government in safeguarding those liberties.
The Christian Foundations of America
Without question, Christianity helped to define American institutions and values (Hall,
2019). Though the United States is a pluralistic nation with a diverse religious landscape,
Christian principles and practices have greatly shaped its laws, customs, and social standards
(McClellan, 1989). Historically rooted in Christian dogma, the idea of marriage emphasizes
monogamy, procreation, and a lifetime commitment between a man and a woman (Hall, 2019).
6
While Masterpiece Cake Shop emphasized the possible contradiction between religious
views and anti-discrimination rules, the Obergefell ruling questioned this conventional wisdom
of marriage. These decisions raise serious issues regarding the place of religion in public life and
the degree of government acceptance of religious objections. It is necessary to accept the variety
of religious points of view that characterize American society. Though Christianity has been the
main influence, other religions have also helped to create the moral and ethical structure of the
country. Appreciating the complexity of the arguments on religious liberty and equality depends
on an awareness of these several points of view.
Constitutional Principles Considerations
The cases of the Obergefell and Masterpiece Cake Shop draw attention to various, often
in conflict, constitutional principles. Important to Obergefell, the Fourteenth Amendment's Due
Process Clause gives people certain basic liberties like the freedom to marry. This case advanced
due process's conception to include same-sex couples.
Masterpiece Cake Shop, on the other hand, engaged with the First Amendment's Free
Exercise Clause, which guards the freedom to practice religion free from government
intervention. The case raised issues concerning the degree to which anti-discrimination rules
might be weighed against this freedom. Both cases additionally involve the Fourteenth
Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, which forbids discrimination based on particular traits
including sexual orientation. The way the Court recognized the term with regard to claims for
religious liberty presented significant challenges.
Constitutional Adjudication and the Role of the Court
7
The decisions made by the Obergefell and Masterpiece Cake Shop highlight the Supreme
Court's essential role in American law and society. The Court, acting as the ultimate interpreter
of the Constitution, has great ability to specify individual rights and the extent of government
power (K. L. Hall, 2002). In these case, the Court interpreted the Constitution differently in
accordance. While Masterpiece Cake Shop displays a more cautious approach to balancing
religious liberty with anti-discrimination laws, Obergefell offers a broader view of individual
rights. These different points of views raise awareness to the complexity of constitutional
adjudication and the possibility of different results on similar problems.
Significant public debate and discord have resulted from the Court's rulings in these
situations. While proponents claim the Court performed its duty as a defender of individual
liberties, others believe the Court overreached itself by imposing its values on society.
Biblical Worldview Analysis
From a biblical perspective, marriage is only for the union of one man and one woman.
As stated in Leviticus 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an
abomination." (Publishers, 2004). This scripture, among others, expresses God's design for
human sexuality and marriage. While supporters of same-sex marriage frequently reference
passages such as Romans 2:14-15 to support their case, these verses address a different issue:
natural law and human conscience. They do not change the biblical definition of marriage. In
Romans 1, the Apostle Paul describes homosexuality as a break from God's intended plan due to
human rebellion (Publishers, 2004). Therefore, from a biblical perspective, the Obergefell ruling
contradicts divine revelation. While the quest for justice and equality is admirable, it should not
overshadow God's ordained moral order.
8
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's rulings in Obergefell v. Hodges and Masterpiece Cake Shop v.
Colorado Civil Rights Commission offer insight on the complex relationship between religious
liberty and the pursuit of equality. While Obergefell extended marriage rights to same-sex
couples, Masterpiece Cake Shop recognized restrictions on the reach of anti-discrimination laws
that affect beliefs. These cases shows the ongoing challenge of balancing individual liberty with
the broader societal goal of nondiscrimination.
The historical evolution of constitutional protections, particularly the Due Process and
Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, has played an important role in ensuring
minority populations' civil rights (Chang, 2020). However, the Court's interpretations of these
clauses, in respect to religious liberty concerns, provide ongoing issues. The Christian
foundations of American society have had a profound impact on legal and social norms, and the
intersection of religious principles with current issues like same-sex marriage continues to
impact public debate (M. D. Hall, 2019).
Ultimately, the rulings in Obergefell and Masterpiece Cake Shop demonstrate the Court's
position as an adjudicator of constitutional meaning. Even though these cases show different
points of view, they all show how individual rights and the general good are always at odds with
each other. As society evolves, the Court will continue to address these difficult issues, shaping
the framework of American law and culture for future generations.
9
References
Chang, R. (2020). The 14th Amendment and Me: How I learned not to give up on the
14th Amendment. Howard Law Journal, 64(1), 53.
https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1834&context=faculty
Hall, K. L. (2002). The Oxford Companion to American Law. In Oxford University Press
eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780195088786.001.0001
Hall, M. D. (2019). Did America have a Christian founding?: Separating Modern Myth
from Historical Truth. HarperChristian + ORM.
McClellan, J. (1989). Liberty, order, and justice: An Introduction to the Constitutional
Principles of American Government.
Masterpiece Cake Shop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. (2018). Oyez.
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/16-111
Obergefell v. Hodges. (2015). Oyez. https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556
Pelts, M. D. (2014). A Look Back at the Defense of Marriage Act: Why Same-Sex Marriage Is
Still Relevant for Social Work. Affilia, 29(2), 237-247.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109913519793
