4 ms·

7-2 decision doesn't sound very narrow to me.

• dangoor 8y ago
  The ruling has a narrow scope (it was based on the way the lower court deliberated, not so much the substance of the issue).
• harryh 8y ago
  In this case "narrow" has to do with the scope of the ruling, not the margin of votes. It could have been 9-0 and still been correctly referred to as "narrow." The court did not rule on the conflict between free speech and discrimination that was at the core of the case. Instead they made a "narrow" ruling saying that the shop owners did not receive a fair hearing in front of the Colorado Civil Rights commission. The broader free speech/discrimination question is still an open one as far as SCOTUS is concerned. I assume we'll see another case down the road somewhere on this topic.
• Tomte 8y ago
  "Narrow" has two meanings in court opinions like these. You mean the first one: a split that's close. The meaning your parent meant was "not making sweeping generalized judgments, but staying close to the case at hand". That's usully considered to be a good thing, because it leaves open the possibility to decide differently another case that is different in a relevant way, but whose relevant difference couldn't really be foreseen on the former case.