Connect with us

National

New agreement ends litigation against Masterpiece Cakeshop

Colorado found probable cause state law violated for not making transgender cake

Published

on

A new agreement will end litigation against Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Masterpiece Cakeshop — famed for its case that reached the U.S. Supreme Court after its owner refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple — has reached a new agreement with the State of Colorado to end subsequent litigation against him.

As part of the new agreement, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission will withdraw its administrative action against owner Jack Phillips. The commission found probable cause the bakery violated state law by refusing to make a cake celebrating a gender transition for a transgender person’s birthday.

In turn, Phillips will voluntarily dismiss his federal court case against Colorado, which cited ongoing harassment from the state in the aftermath of the narrow ruling in his favor by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat, said in a statement the decision is beneficial for all parties involved.

“After careful consideration of the facts, both sides agreed it was not in anyone’s best interest to move forward with these cases,” Weiser said. “The larger constitutional issues might well be decided down the road, but these cases will not be the vehicle for resolving them. Equal justice for all will continue to be a core value that we will uphold as we enforce our state’s and nation’s civil rights laws.”

Last year, the Supreme Court stopped short of asserting a First Amendment right for Phillips to refuse service to a same-sex couple based on freedom of religion and freedom of speech, but ruled in his favor based on the facts of the case, finding anti-religion bias on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

On the day the Supreme Court decision was handed down, an attorney asked Phillips to create a cake with pink on the inside and blue on the outside to celebrate a gender transition from male to female. Phillips declined the request on religious grounds. 

Weeks later, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission declared it had found probable cause Colorado law requires Phillips to create the requested gender-transition cake. In turn, Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-LGBT legal group, filed the federal lawsuit against Colorado, citing ongoing harassment of Phillips.

Kristen Waggoner,  who argued the Masterpiece Cakeshop case before the Supreme Court as senior Vice President of the U.S. legal division of Alliance Defending Freeedom, said in a statement the agreement is a victory for Phillips.

“The state of Colorado is dismissing its case against Jack, stopping its six and a half years of hostility toward him for his beliefs,” Waggoner said. “Jack’s victory is great news for everyone. Tolerance and respect for good-faith differences of opinion are essential in a diverse society like ours. They enable us to peacefully coexist with each another. But the state’s demonstrated and ongoing hostility toward Jack because of his beliefs is undeniable.”

Daniel Ramos, executive director of One Colorado, said in a statement Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act remains in effect despite the agreement.

“Despite the mutual agreement between the State of Colorado and Masterpiece Cakeshop, the law is still the law,” Ramos said. “No matter who you are, who you love, or what you believe, Coloradans across our state – including LGBTQ Coloradans and their families – are still protected under Colorado law from discrimination in the areas of employment, housing, and public accommodations. 

According to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, each side will bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees and the agreement doesn’t affect the ability of Autumn Scardina, the transgender complainant in the state administrative case, to pursue a claim on her own. 


Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Advocacy groups issue US travel advisory ahead of World Cup

Renee Good’s death in Minneapolis among incidents cited

Published

on

(Photo by fifg/Bigstock)

More than 100 organizations have issued a travel advisory for the U.S. ahead of the 2026 World Cup.

The World Cup will take place in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico from June 11-July 19.

“In light of the deteriorating human rights situation in the United States and in the absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA, host cities, or the U.S. government, the undersigned organizations are issuing this travel advisory for fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States for the June 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown,” reads the advisory that the Council for Global Equality and other groups that include the American Civil Liberties Union issued on April 23.  “The impacts of these policies vary by locality.”

“While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all, those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm when traveling to and/or within the United States,” it adds. “This travel advisory calls on fans, players, journalists, and other visitors to exercise caution.”

The advisory specifically mentions Renee Good.

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent on Jan. 7 shot and killed her in Minneapolis. Good, 37, left behind her wife and three children.

The full advisory can be read here.

Continue Reading

State Department

Democracy Forward files FOIA request for State Department bathroom policy records

April 20 memo outlined anti-transgender rule

Published

on

(Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress)

Democracy Forward on Tuesday filed a Freedom of Information Act request for records on the State Department’s new bathroom policy.

A memo titled “Updates Regarding Biological Sex and Intimate Spaces, Including Restrooms” that the State Department issued on April 20 notes employees can no longer use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.

“The administration affirms that there are two sexes — male and female — and that federal facilities should operate on this objective and longstanding basis to ensure consistency, privacy, and safety in shared spaces,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggot told the Daily Signal, a conservative news website that first reported on the memo. “In line with President Trump’s executive order this provides clear, uniform guidance to the department by grounding policy in biological sex as determined at birth.”

President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. The sweeping directive also ordered federal government agencies to “effectuate this policy by taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity.”

Democracy Forward’s FOIA request that the Washington Blade exclusively obtained on Tuesday is specifically seeking a copy of the memo that details the State Department’s new bathroom policy. Democracy Forward has also requested “all” memo-specific communications between the State Department’s Bureau of Global Public Affairs and the Daily Signal from April 1-21.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

House Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill

Measures would restrict federal funding for LGBTQ-affirming schools

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Republicans have been gaining ground in reshaping education policy to be less inclusive toward LGBTQ students at the state level, and now they are turning their focus to Capitol Hill.

Some GOP lawmakers are pushing for a nationwide “Don’t Say Gay” bill, doubling down on their commitment to being the party of “traditional family values” by excluding anyone who does not identify with their sex at birth.

The largest anti-LGBTQ education legislation to reach the House chamber is House Bill 2616 — the Parental Rights Over the Education and Care of Their Kids Act, or the PROTECT Kids Act. The PROTECT Kids Act, proposed by U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), and co-sponsored by U.S. Reps. Burgess Owens (R-Utah), Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Robert Onder (R-Mo.), and Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), would require any public elementary and middle schools that receive federal funding to require parental consent to change a child’s gender expression in school.

The bill, which was discussed during Tuesday’s House Rules Committee hearing, would specifically require any schools that get federal money from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 — which was created to minimize financial discrepancies in education for low-income students — to get parental approval before identifying any child’s gender identity as anything other than what was provided to the school initially. This includes getting approval before allowing children to use their preferred locker room or bathroom.

It reads that any school receiving this funding “shall obtain parental consent before changing a covered student’s (1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or (2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.”

LGBTQ rights advocates have criticized both national and state efforts to require parental permission to use a child’s preferred gender identity, as it raises issues of at-home safety — especially if the home is not LGBTQ-affirming — and could lead to the outing of transgender or gender-curious students.

A follow-up bill, HB 2617, proposed by Owens, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, prevents the use of federal funding to “advance concepts related to gender ideology,” using the definition from President Donald Trump’s 2025 Executive Order 14168, making that an enshrined definition in law of sex rather than just by executive order. There is also a bill making its way through the senate with the same text— Senate Bill 2251.

Advocates have also criticized this follow-up legislation, as it would restrict school staff — including teachers and counselors — from acknowledging trans students’ identities or providing any support. They have said that this kind of isolation can worsen mental health outcomes for LGBTQ youth and allows for education to be politicized rather than being based in reality.

David Stacy, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president of government affairs, called this legislation out for using LGBTQ children as political pawns in an ideology fight — one that could greatly harm the safety of these children if passed.

“Trans kids are not a political agenda — they are students who deserve safety and affirmation at school like anyone else,” Stacy said in a statement. “Despite the many pressing issues facing our nation, House Republicans continue their bizarre obsession with trans people. H.R. 2616 does not protect children. It targets them. This bill is cruel, and we’re prepared to fight it.”

This is similar to Florida House Bills 1557 and 1069, referred to as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill and “Don’t Say They” bill, respectively, restricting classroom discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity, prohibiting the use of pronouns consistent with one’s gender identity, expanding book banning procedures, and censoring health curriculum.

The American Civil Liberties Union is tracking 233 bills related to restricting student and educator rights in the U.S.

Continue Reading

Popular