In a 6-3 split decision released Tuesday, Colorado’s high court said plaintiff “Autumn” Scardina made a critical error when he sued Phillips in a state court instead of appealing a legal settlement made by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, according to a story published by Courthouse News.
Scardina, a man who identifies as woman, is the Denver attorney who harassed Phillips with a phone call to his bakery, in 2017, on the very same day the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Phillips’ appeal in his lawsuit against the state commission.
In that phone call, Scardina demanded Phillips create a “gender-transition” cake for him, which Phillips predictably refused to do because of its purpose. So the attorney filed a commission complaint alleging he was the victim of discrimination by the business owner.
Phillips went on the win that U.S. Supreme Court appeal, in 2018. The high court's narrow ruling said the Christian business owner did not get a fair commission hearing, back in 2012, due to religious hostility expressed by some of its commissioners.
Phillips is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, the religious liberty law firm that has represented him since 2012. That is when a homosexual customer, seeking a same-sex wedding cake, filed a complaint with the controversial state commission.
"Enough is enough," ADF attorney Jake Warner, reacting to the Colorado court ruling, tells AFN. "Jack has been dragged through courts for over a decade. It's time to leave him alone."
After Scardina filed his complaint in 2017, Phillips and ADF surprisingly went on offense and sued the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. After the state commission reached a settlement with the bakery owner, Scardina sued Phillips in a state court.
Much like the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, which did not address Phillips’ free speech rights, the Colorado justices did not rule this week on the merits of Scardina’s discrimination complaint. They wrote the attorney should have followed a procedure for appealing the settlement, which would have kept the legal appeal moving forward, but chose not to do so.
In the Colorado ruling, a majority of the justices joined a 29-page opinion written by Justice Melissa Martin. The three dissenting justices joined a 27-page opinion by Justice Richard Gabriel.
