Now that the Supreme Court has decided in favor of Masterpiece Cakeshop will they take up the case of Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, WA?
 
I’m not clear on the specific legal arguments, but the circumstances of Barronelle Stutzman’s case are really identical to those of Masterpiece. Both business owners are more than happy to sell any of their products to gays. They simply decline to provide services/products for a homosexual wedding celebration because it goes against their Christian faith.

The Washington state Supreme Court unanimously ruled in 2017 that Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, and owner Barronelle Stutzman, violated state anti-discrimination law when she refused to sell wedding flowers to a gay couple, citing her religious beliefs.
 
“I serve everyone. What I can’t do is create custom floral arrangements that celebrate events or express messages at odds with my faith,” Stutzman said in a statement. “For that, the attorney general has relentlessly prosecuted me, even suing me in my personal capacity.”

 
Here’s Barronelle’s story, via Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) ~
 

When Washington State florist Barronelle Stutzman was asked by a longtime customer and friend to create floral arrangements celebrating his same-sex wedding, she politely declined because of her religious beliefs. The State and customer sued Barronelle, and the Washington Supreme Court ruled that the government can force her—and, by extension, countless others—to create artistic expression and participate in events that violate their deepest convictions. In July 2017, ADF petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to take up Barronelle’s case. That petition is still pending.

Does our Constitution allow the government to force people to create art that violates their beliefs? The Supreme Court clearly said “no” in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. To be consistent, they should reach the same conclusion in Barronelle’s case.