--- title: SCOTUS Decision on Masterpiece Cakeshop Was Very Narrow description: The Masterpiece Cakeshop case presented a chance for the Supreme Court to draw lines on free speech and religious exercise. canonical: https://time.com/5304205/scotus-masterpiece-cakeshop-decision/ author: Katy Steinmetz article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2018-06-07T11:31:08.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-03-31T11:39:13.109Z article:section: Ideas og:title: What the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop Decision Didn’t Change og:description: Many questions remain unanswered og:url: https://time.com/5304205/scotus-masterpiece-cakeshop-decision/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt7a33386f1c2713d6/69893274656a3f6094bd4a13/jack-phillips-supreme-court-cake-same-sex-couple.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 2405 og:image:height: 1353 og:image:alt: Jack Phillips Supreme Court Ruling og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: What the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop Decision Didn’t Change twitter:description: Many questions remain unanswered twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt7a33386f1c2713d6/69893274656a3f6094bd4a13/jack-phillips-supreme-court-cake-same-sex-couple.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # What the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop Decision Didn’t Change > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=ce0fd17a-ec96-4cbd-a623-0ce705b4ba96&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=ce0fd17a-ec96-4cbd-a623-0ce705b4ba96&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=ce0fd17a-ec96-4cbd-a623-0ce705b4ba96&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=ce0fd17a-ec96-4cbd-a623-0ce705b4ba96&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1) by [Katy Steinmetz](https://time.com/author/katy-steinmetz/) ## Katy Steinmetz Jun 7, 2018 11:31 AM UTC  Phillips, at his bakery, smiling after the decision Phillips, at his bakery, smiling after the decision Joe Amon—Denver Post/Getty Images by [Katy Steinmetz](https://time.com/author/katy-steinmetz/) ## Katy Steinmetz Jun 7, 2018 11:31 AM UTC Since same-sex marriage became the law of the land, the battle over LGBT rights has shifted from the altar to the cash register. As wedding vendors have turned away same-sex couples for moral reasons, lawsuits have pitted the right to be served against the right to refuse. The much watched case of Colorado baker Jack Phillips presented a chance for the Supreme Court to draw lines in a tangled debate about free speech, religious exercise and equal treatment in the public square. But while the ruling came down on June 4, many potent legal questions remain unresolved. The narrow decision arrived six years after a clash at Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colo., when Charlie Craig and David Mullins asked Phillips to make them a custom wedding cake and he declined, citing his religious opposition to same-sex marriages. When the couple filed a complaint under a state law that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, Colorado agencies ruled in their favor. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court reversed course and sided with the baker–but not because the state agencies necessarily came to the wrong conclusion. The key reason was that officials showed “elements of a clear and impermissible hostility” toward Phillips’ religious beliefs while considering the case, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the court’s majority opinion. One piece of evidence the Justices pointed to was a commissioner who “disparaged Phillips’ faith as despicable.” The legal team representing the couple emphasized that while they may have lost, the other side did not get the broad win some conservatives hoped for: a blanket assurance that religious freedom trumps antidiscrimination measures. On a conference call, American Civil Liberties Union attorney James Esseks highlighted language that acknowledged the civil rights of gay Americans. “Our society has come to the recognition that gay persons and gay couples cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth,” Kennedy wrote, adding that business owners cannot be allowed to “in effect” put up signs saying that “no goods or services will be sold if they will be used for gay marriages.” The ruling was still a win for those who believe religious freedom is under attack. Some Christians feel they’re unfairly victimized for holding the increasingly unpopular opinion that same-sex marriage is wrong, and the Supreme Court decision is fuel for their fires. “They really quashed the playing of favorites,” says Nicolle Martin, Phillips’ lead counsel in Colorado. “If somebody has a sincere conviction, you can’t dismiss it.” The clearest message of the decision may be that government officials had best be careful as they continue to referee these fights. Among the questions that remain unanswered: Does forcing a baker to make a cake for a same-sex wedding violate the baker’s rights to free speech? Is making a cake a form of speech? If another gay couple came into Masterpiece Cakeshop today and asked for a wedding cake, would Phillips be within his rights to refuse them? Experts say it remains unclear. “Whatever the outcome of some future controversy involving facts similar to these,” Kennedy wrote, the Colorado ruling must be set aside because it was not the result of “neutral and respectful consideration.” There will certainly be future controversy: among the cases the Supreme Court may soon hear is one involving a florist who refused to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding in Washington State. (The state ruled for the couple.) Some LGBT-rights advocates believe that the ruling itself will generate more litigation–that despite the caveats, the fact that the baker won will embolden more religious business owners to turn away LGBT people, who may in turn have cause to sue. “This Supreme Court opinion invites a lot more discrimination to test the contours of these legal principles,” says Jennifer Pizer, law and policy director for the LGBT civil rights organization Lambda Legal. After the ruling, Mullins and Craig vowed that “our fight against discrimination and unfair treatment will continue.” As for Phillips, he was back at his shop, serving supportive customers. When asked, Martin said the baker was thrilled about the ruling and “very thankful” to higher powers. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/5304205/scotus-masterpiece-cakeshop-decision/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/5304205/scotus-masterpiece-cakeshop-decision/"},"headline":"What the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop Decision Didn’t Change","datePublished":"2018-06-07T11:31:08.000Z","dateModified":"2026-03-31T11:39:13.109Z","description":"The Masterpiece Cakeshop case presented a chance for the Supreme Court to draw lines on free speech and religious exercise.","url":"https://time.com/5304205/scotus-masterpiece-cakeshop-decision/","keywords":["Supreme Court","same sex marriage","Christians","scotus","LGBTQ Rights"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt7a33386f1c2713d6/69893274656a3f6094bd4a13/jack-phillips-supreme-court-cake-same-sex-couple.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Katy Steinmetz","jobTitle":"","url":"https://time.com/author/katy-steinmetz/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt7a33386f1c2713d6/69893274656a3f6094bd4a13/jack-phillips-supreme-court-cake-same-sex-couple.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Jack Phillips Supreme Court Ruling","caption":"Jack Phillips Supreme Court Ruling on Cake Shop","creditText":"Joe Amon—Denver Post/Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/tag/supreme-court/","name":"Supreme Court"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/5304205/scotus-masterpiece-cakeshop-decision/","name":"What the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop Decision Didn’t Change"}}]}] ```