Following a five-year legal battle that drew national attention, a California judge has ruled in favor of a bakery owner who refused to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple because it violated her religious beliefs.

Kern County Superior Court Judge J. Eric Bradshaw ruled Friday that Catherine Miller, owner of Tastries Bakery in Bakersfield, acted lawfully while upholding her Christian beliefs about what the Bible teaches about marriage, court document show. 

The California Department of Fair Housing and Employment sued Cathy’s Creations Inc., doing business as Tastries Bakery, on Oct. 17, 2018 claiming Miller intentionally discriminated against the couple and violated California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act.

During a visit to the bakery in August 2017, Miller declined creating the cake for Eileen and Miyera Rodriguez-Del Rio before referring them to a different bakery, Bradshaw wrote in his nearly two-dozen page ruling.

At the time of the denial, court papers show, the couple were already married, but were planning a wedding “with lots of guests” and their “to-do” list included buying a three-tier white wedding cake.

Her attorneys argued her right to free speech, and free expression of religion trumped the argument that she violated the anti-discrimination law. 

High court backs LGBTQ student group:Supreme Court temporarily backs LGBTQ student group seeking recognition at Jewish university

St. Louis fatal school shooting:2 killed, 6 injured in shooting at St. Louis high school; suspect killed by police, authorities say

The decision was welcomed as a First Amendment victory by Miller and her pro-bono lawyers with the conservative Thomas More Society.

“I’m hoping that in our community we can grow together,” Miller told the Bakersfield Californian after the ruling. “And we should understand that we shouldn’t push any agenda against anyone else.”

Miller, who created Tastries in 2013, told the outlet she never meant to hurt anyone but that she could not make the cake because it meant she would participate in the couple’s same-sex marriage.

“I’m hoping that in our community we can grow together,” she said, “and we should understand that we shouldn’t push any agenda against anyone else.”

The plaintiff in the case, the DFEH, said through a spokeswoman only that it was aware of the ruling but had not determine what to do next.