The Supreme Court in the state of Colorado finally handed embattled Christian baker Jack Phillips, who owns the Masterpiece Cakeshop, a huge victory by throwing out a lawsuit that was brought against him after he refused to make a cake celebrating a gender transition. A lawsuit of this nature is proof that the radical left and gender activists aren’t after equal rights, but affirmation and full acceptance of their insane ideology by those who disagree with him.
On Tuesday, the highest court in the state ruled 4-3 to dismiss the lawsuit against Phillips and his bakery. Justice Melissa Hart, who wrote up the court’s majority opinion, stated that the plantiff”s claims of discrimination had not been adequately processed. “Could the district court properly consider the claims of discrimination presented here? In light of this dispute’s procedural journey, it could not,” Hart stated.
The justice then added, “Scardina could have appealed the Commission’s decision to close the administrative adjudication without providing the statutorily mandated order but [he] did not. Instead, [Scardina] brought [his] discrimination claim anew in the district court.” She added, “We granted certiorari to determine, among other issues, whether Scardina properly filed [his] case in the district court. We conclude that [he] did not.”
According to The Christian Tribune, the dissenting opinion — authored by Justice Richard L. Gabriel — said that the majority ruling, “erroneously gives Masterpiece and Phillips a procedural pass.” He then attempted to make the case that ”Substantively, the majority’s ruling throws Scardina completely out of court and deprives [him] of the opportunity to seek a remedy for alleged discriminatory conduct based on a novel interpretation of law that no party asserted and, to my knowledge, no court has adopted.”
The judge added, “I am concerned that Masterpiece and Phillips will construe today’s ruling as a vindication of their refusal to sell non-expressive products with no intrinsic meaning to customers who are members of a protected class (here, the LGBTQ+ community) if Phillips opposes the purpose for which the customers will use the products. Such a claim, though unfounded, could detrimentally impact those affected by such conduct.”
"*" indicates required fields
While this is a notable victory for Phillips, it is important to note that it was not ruled on the basis of religious freedom. Therefore, as the National Review wrote, “I am happy for Phillips, but don’t be surprised if he is again subjected to merciless lawfare — perhaps even by Scardina, as the Court ruled that “we express no opinion about the merits of Scardina’s claims, and nothing about today’s holding alters the protections afforded by CADA.””
The outlet further noted that Phillips, who first made headlines for his Supreme Court victory in 2018 for refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, has become a target of LGBT activists. The article continued, “Phillips has become a symbol of religious resistance to LGBT cultural agendas. I worry that he will again be asked to design a cake for an event that his faith opposes, and this time the proper procedures will be followed so that his figurative scalp can be nailed to the wall. (Don’t forget, he lost on the merits in the trial court and in court of appeals.)”
Would liberals be okay with a neo-Nazi walking into a black owned bakery and demanding a cake made with a swastika on it, despite this obvious racism and bigotry going against everything the owners believe? Of course not. And that’s why businesses have the right to refuse service for any reason. It helps protect all people and makes the playing field much more level.
And that’s how it should be. If only those on the other side of the argument understood this principle.