Jack Phillips has lost another battle in his war to be free from decorating cakes against his will. He brought the issue to the Supreme Court in 2018, but the justices disposed of the case of the Christian baker without deciding the central issue. Another case in the current term (303 Creative v. Elenis) may provide a clear ruling, but that’s far from a given. Perhaps the one good thing from Phillips’ latest defeat by woke cry-bullies is to motivate the justices to set a bright line standard. His latest loss concerns his refusal to create a pink cake with blue frosting for a “customer” who hoped he would refuse.
Alphabet People Against Christian Baker
H.L. Mencken said, “Puritanism is the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.” The Puritans have nothing on the woke. Charlie Craig and David Mullins were the first to set upon Phillips in 2012. The same-sex couple wanted the Christian baker at his Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, CO, to make them a wedding cake. Phillips refused because his religious faith prevents him from celebrating same-sex marriages. Craig and Mullins easily obtained a cake elsewhere but pressed a claim against Phillips. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, but the justices refused to rule on the question they took the case to resolve. It’s why Phillips is still being pursued by and losing to LGBTQIA+ bullies.
The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld a lower court finding that Phillips discriminated against a transgender person who tried to order a pink birthday cake with blue frosting. At least, Craig and Mullins seemed to come by their totalitarian activism spontaneously. Unfortunately, the same is not true for Autumn Scardina, a trans activist and lawyer. Scardina didn’t need a cake but wanted her order to be refused so she could use it as a cudgel against Phillips. The Colorado court ruled:
“Phillips testified that a pink cake with blue frosting has no intrinsic meaning and does not express any message. Similarly, Masterpiece and Phillips concede they would gladly prepare and sell a custom pink cake with blue frosting to members of the general public. Given the depth and sincerity of Phillips’ religious beliefs concerning transgender identity, it is clear that he would not agree to make a pink and blue cake if he thought it was inherently associated with a pro-transgender message.”
The 303 Creative v. Elenis case argued this term is a watered-down version of the original Masterpiece Cakeshop case. The reason? It considers only a free speech question and does not include the free exercise of religion, which Phillips asserts. To the Colorado authorities, that Phillips would make a pink cake with blue icing for practically any event except the celebration of a trans coming out makes his conduct illegal. To Phillips, the whole point is that his faith requires him to deny the celebration of unholy acts, making the nature of the occasion the point. The baker does not create items celebrating Halloween for the same reason.
On Simmer for Five Years
Jack Phillips (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post via Getty Images)
Scardina ordered the cake in this case on the very day the Supreme Court announced it would hear Masterpiece Cakeshop: June 26, 2017. It’s been more than five years, and this case is not over yet. It may still travel through the federal courts and could rise again before the Supreme Court, which will likely take it.
In the first Masterpiece Cakeshop case, the Court said it would decide if Colorado compelling “Phillips to create expression that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage violates the Free Speech or Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment.” Instead, the Court found Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission was so hostile to the faithful that it did not need to rule on the merits. The 303 Creative case eliminated the free exercise question. Instead, the Court’s order granting the case said it was taking it on free-speech grounds.
Where does that leave Phillips? Back at the mercy of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which the Supreme Court already ruled “showed elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs motivating his objection.” Phillips said he will appeal this ruling. He offers a variety of baked goods and branded swag for sale online — but not cakes.
