A procedural ruling brings an unexpected twist to a high-profile discrimination case involving a Colorado baker and a transgender woman.
According to 9NEWS, the Colorado Supreme Court has dismissed a lawsuit against Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who refused to bake a cake for a transgender woman's gender transition celebration.
Attorney Autumn Scardina filed the lawsuit in 2017, claiming that Phillips discriminated against her when he refused to make a pink cake with blue frosting for her gender transition celebration. This case has garnered national attention, especially since Phillips had previously been involved in a related legal battle that went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018.
In a 6-3 majority opinion, the Colorado Supreme Court justices ruled that Scardina had not exhausted all available options to seek redress through other courts before filing her lawsuit. This technicality became the basis for dismissing the case without delving into its merits.
Justice Melissa Hart, writing for the majority, emphasized that the court was not making any judgment on the substance of the claims. This approach effectively sidestepped the complex issues of free speech and discrimination that many observers had anticipated would be addressed.
John McHugh, Scardina's attorney, expressed disappointment with the court's decision. He criticized the justices for what he perceived as an evasion of the core issues, stating that the court had "invented an argument no party raised" to avoid addressing the merits of the case.
On the other side, Jake Werner, representing Phillips from the Alliance Defending Freedom, welcomed the dismissal. He argued that his client had faced years of harassment and legal challenges, asserting that it was time for the pursuit of Phillips to end.
The minority justices who dissented from the ruling raised concerns about the potential implications of the decision. They argued that the procedural dismissal effectively gave Phillips a "pass" and might be misconstrued as a vindication of his actions.
This case is part of a series of legal battles involving Phillips and his Denver-area bakery. In 2018, Phillips achieved a partial victory at the U.S. Supreme Court in a case where he had refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
Scardina's attempt to order her cake coincided with the U.S. Supreme Court's announcement that it would hear Phillips' appeal in the wedding cake case. She maintained that her order was not a set-up for litigation but rather a challenge to Phillips' claims that he would serve LGBTQ+ customers.
The legal journey of this case has been complex, involving multiple courts and administrative bodies. Initially, Scardina filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which found probable cause of discrimination. The case took an unexpected turn when the state and Phillips agreed to drop their respective cases in a settlement that did not involve Scardina. This settlement, reached in March 2019, led Scardina to pursue her lawsuit independently.
This case has gone through a complicated legal process, moving through several courts and administrative bodies. Scardina first filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which found enough evidence to support a discrimination claim. However, in an unexpected development, the state and Phillips agreed to drop their cases through a settlement in March 2019, which did not include Scardina. As a result, she decided to continue her lawsuit on her own.
The Colorado Supreme Court's dismissal of the transgender cake case on procedural grounds leaves the underlying issues of discrimination and free speech unresolved. The court avoided addressing the merits of the case, focusing instead on a technical legal point regarding the proper avenue for challenging the previous settlement. This decision has sparked mixed reactions, with supporters of both parties expressing frustration at the lack of a definitive ruling on the core issues. The case highlights the ongoing tension between religious freedom, free speech, and anti-discrimination laws in the United States.
