After SCOTUS rules in favor of Colorado baker, the implications for other businesses that refuse to serve same-sex couples on religious grounds

WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 05: Demonstrators rally in front of the Supreme Court building on the day the court is to hear the case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission December 5, 2017 in Washington, DC. Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins filed a complaint with the commission after conservative Christian baker Jack Phillips refused to sell them a wedding cake for their same-sex ceremony. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Supreme Court ruled narrowly Monday for a Colorado baker who wouldn't make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

But the court is not deciding the big issue in the case, whether a business can invoke religious objections to refuse service to gay and lesbian people.

The justices' limited ruling turned on what the court described as anti-religious bias on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission when it ruled against baker Jack Phillips. The justices voted 7-2 that the commission violated Phillips' rights under the First Amendment.

Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion that the issue "must await further elaboration." Appeals in similar cases are pending, including one at the Supreme Court from a florist who didn't want to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding.

With files from the Associated Press.

Guests:

Jonathan Keller, president and CEO of the California Family Council, a Christian-based non-profit educational organization, which filed an amicus brief on behalf of the petitioner Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd.

Kyle Velte, visiting assistant professor at the Texas Tech University School of Law, and incoming faculty of the University of Kansas School of Law; she filed an amicus brief on behalf the respondents in this case