Tastries Bakery v. State of California

A baker can refuse to create a custom cake for a same-sex wedding as an act of protected artistic expression, but cannot generally refuse service to protected groups.

ReligiousLiberty.TV
February 26, 2026
0 min read
Cite This Case
Tastries Bakery v. State of California (2018).
✓ Copied! Standard law review / practitioner format. Verify against current Bluebook edition (21st ed.).

⚠ No official reporter citation found for this case. Citation quality will improve once a reporter citation (e.g. 573 U.S. 682) is added to the case record.

Tastries Bakery v. State of California (State Appellate Court, 2018). https://religiousliberty.tv/case-library/tastries-bakery/
✓ Copied! For legal scholarship in social science journals. Includes URL back to this case page.

⚠ No official reporter citation found for this case. Citation quality will improve once a reporter citation (e.g. 573 U.S. 682) is added to the case record.

Tastries Bakery v. State of California [State Appellate Court, 2018] — A baker can refuse to create a custom cake for a same-sex wedding as an act of protected artistic expression, but cannot generally refuse service to protected groups. Source: ReligiousLiberty.TV (https://religiousliberty.tv/case-library/tastries-bakery/, accessed April 9, 2026).
✓ Copied! For general audiences, journalism, press releases, and non-legal writing.

⚠ No official reporter citation found for this case. Citation quality will improve once a reporter citation (e.g. 573 U.S. 682) is added to the case record.

Year: 2018 Court: State Appellate Court
Holding: A baker can refuse to create a custom cake for a same-sex wedding as an act of protected artistic expression, but cannot generally refuse service to protected groups.
Uses AI to generate a structured summary. Takes ~10 seconds.

Official Documents

Coverage on ReligiousLiberty.TV

📎 Document links found in our articles: 📄 opinion

Tastries Bakery v. State of California is a Free Exercise case decided by the State Appellate Court in 2018. The court held that a baker can refuse to create a custom cake for a same-sex wedding as an act of protected artistic expression, but cannot generally refuse service to protected groups.