Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Colorado Baker

[robvalue]

Having read the article more closely, it seems unclear if he'll be allowed to get away with discriminating in the future. It looks like the charge against him for doing it was dropped, but not in a way that sets a precedent.

As far as I can tell, he would not get away with this again if his case was handled correctly. Do you think that's right? Or is this really still for the courts to decide?

The two arguments seem to be at odds:

"It's only a cake, it doesn't really matter, so who cares if someone can't get one"

versus

"It's a work of art and he shouldn't have to give it away to just anyone"

Which is it? Anyhow, I still don't see how it being "art" has anything to do with it. Does this actually carry some legal weight? Or is just another flimsy argument to try and justify bigotry?