Constitutional Law in Business Practice Must post first. CO-1, CO-2, CO-3, CO-4 Many businesses today, as corporate entities other than sole proprietorships, voice their political and social views in various ways. Chick-fil-A is an example of a business that voiced prominent views on the issue of LGBTQ rights, a perception it since has tried to reverse. This news article briefly summarizes the Chick-fil-A controversy. The subject of LGBTQ rights is an evolving issue of constitutional implications. Another business, a Colorado bakery, stepped into center ring of controversy asserting that First Amendment free exercise of religion must be recognized by the government in the application of discrimination laws. QUESTION FOR THIS FORUM DISCUSSION: When does the First Amendment’s Free Exercise of Religion Clause justify a discriminatory business practice? In forming your discussion, READ and COMPARE: Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 138 S.Ct. 1718 (2018). Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. (a small bakery, whose owner refused to create and sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple for their wedding because their homosexual marriage was against his religious beliefs) and State of Washington v. Arlene’s Flowers, Case No. 91615-2 (Wash., June 6, 2019)(florist claimed right to deny flowers to same-sex wedding for reason of religion). ADDITIONAL HELP SOURCES: Another case you should consider is the Court’s finding of race discrimination under the Commerce Clause in Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964). Would it make a difference if the restaurant owner claimed segregation of the races was required by his religion? Additional Chick-fil-A reference: Severson, K. (2012, July 25). Chick-fil-A thrust back into the spotlight on gay rights. New York Times . https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/us/gay-rights-uproar-over-chick-fil-a-widens.html From eReserve readings: Supreme Court Sends Mixed Messages About LGBTQ Rights https://apuedge.com/supreme-court-cases-send-mixed-messages-about-lgbtq-rights/
