strong religious objections to same-sex marriage. so this is this ruling coming out right now. jack phillips was the owner of that masterpiecke shop lakewood. the couple are charlie craig and david mullens. this just coming out right now. bill: the ruling is a 59-page decision and you will need a little time tgo through that. i don t think it will happen at the moment but trying to find at the moment how the justices broke down in a case like this, which could prove significant. a lot of observers on the right and left are waiting to see how a court under neil gorsuch and under the trump administration would rule in a case like this. they rule narrowly in favor of the colorado baker who would not bake that cake. sandra: the supreme court ruled 7-2 that colorado s
but the speaker was having a little fun there and he sounded to me like he was kind of riffing. i don t think there is yet a trump party. when trump is gone i think the republican party will still be the party of lower taxes, lighter regulations, strong defense and the rest of it. and mr. trump will go his way. the argument, of course, from a lot of conservatives is oh no, he will be a stain on the republican party forever and we may even need a new party to represent the conservative movement. i kind of doubt that. sandra: interesting stf. great to start off the week with you, brit. thank you. bill: the line of the morning. sandra: making a lot of noise over there. bill: u.s. supreme court now with a ruling narrowly in favor for the colorado baker who would not make a wedding cake for a same sex couple. you may recall this case now. his name is jack phillips.
broad sweeping it isn t saying that no one ever has to participate in a wedding ceremony if they re in this type of business but points back to the commissioner and says if there is obvious religious bias against someone belis you can t base a ous decision on that. there was a very pointed moment where justice kennedy was talking to the attorneys for the couple and said tolerance has to work both ways. i m very concerned by what i ve seen in this case that tolerance was not extended to mr. jack phillips the baker because of his religious beliefs. you didn t want to pin too much one way or the other on that statement when he made it during the arguments. he was tough on both sides and you never know if he is playing devil s advocate or trying to still make up his own mind. that moment really stood out. it was clear he thought this baker had not gotten a fair shake. it looks like in the decision today he is pointing back to that language from the
not make a wedding cake for a same sex couple. we ve got shannon bream standing by on the phone with us right now in what has been about a five-year conversation. the supreme court is now setting aside the court ruling against the baker who wouldn t make this wedding cake for that same sex couple. what are you learning now that you ve been able to look at the details here, the supreme court ruled 7-2 that colorado s actions violated the free exercise clause. it s interesting. i haven t been able to read the whole thing. i m in my car on the way to the studio. but from what i can tell, we really thought they would be looking back to the statements by the commission. the initial first body that looked at this case and ruled against the baker here, jack phillips. there were comments by one of the commissioners how he felt about the religious issue. the wording in the opinion that i ve seen is this isn t a huge
so of the colorado officials who enforced this regulation, they were not neutral, they were hostile, they were hostile to the christian belief that marriage is between one man an one woman. so with respect to this case and this case only, the baker ls becae th decision not to bake the cake is rooted in his religious beliefs. i think this is a dangerous opinion because it will allow others to say my religious beliefs prohibit me from dealing with women or italians or african-americans and they ll base it on the logic in this case. sandra: we ll see where it goes next. 7-2 in favor of the baker. i thought it would be 5-4. i was surprised. bill: new questions swirling around facebook and the privacy of your data. a new controversy. facebook is responding. what you need to know coming up next right here.