Posted on 06/11/2019 5:41:46 AM PDT by LibWhacker
Masterpiece Cakeshop is again under fire, now the subject of a third discrimination lawsuit alleging that owner Jack Phillips "discriminated" against a customer by refusing to make a cake for an unspecified event.
Phillips, of course, won at the United States Supreme Court after suing a Colorado "human rights" commission that punished him for refusing to provide a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding in Denver, a task Phillips said violated his religious conviction that true marriage is between one man and one woman. Phillips offered to sell the couple a pre-made cake or refer them to another baker solutions that would have allowed Phillips to avoid material participation in the same-sex wedding but the couple wasn't satisfied and leveled a complaint with Colorado authorities.
Ultimately, in a decisive Supreme Court victory, Phillips won against the Colorado human rights commission, but the victory hinged on the behavior of the commission itself, which SCOTUS found to be harassing and discriminatory. The Supreme Court refused to issue a verdict on whether the First Amendment's free exercise clause protects Christians from being forced to participate in same-sex weddings or any event or action that violates their right of conscience.
But, intent on punishing Phillips for his "crimes," leftists have hit the baker twice with lawsuits alleging further "discrimination," once the day of the Supreme Court verdict that was tossed out and again last week, according to CBS's Denver affiliate.
"The latest lawsuit was filed Wednesday in Denver District Court on behalf of Autumn Scardina by attorneys Paula Greisen and John McHugh," the outlet reports.
Scardina is the same woman who filed the previous lawsuit alleging discrimination after Masterpiece Cakeshop denied her request made the day Phillips won his case for a cake celebrating her gender transition. Reports on this newest lawsuit are vague on the theme of the pastry in question they have said, so far, only that Scardina requested a "birthday cake" but previous filings indicate that Scardina has gone out of her way on several occasions to request cakes Masterpiece Cakeshop clearly will not make.
Newsweek reports that the baked goods at the center of Scardina's previous complaints to Colorado authorities included a "cake to celebrate Satan's birthday," with "cheesecake frosting" that would feature "a large figure of Satan, licking a 9 black Dildo...an actual working model, that can be turned on before we unveil the cake."
Phillips said then that he believes Scardina regularly requests objectionable cakes from his bakery, including cakes with pentagrams and upside-down crosses.
Scardina's previous lawsuit, based on claims Phillips made during the original same-sex wedding cake litigation that he would make "any" cake for an LGBT customer except for a wedding cake, was dropped back in September of last year, after Phillips agreed to drop his own discrimination case against the state of Colorado, according to Colorado Public Radio.
But Scardina, apparently, felt no need to give up.
"A new lawsuit has been filed against Masterpiece Cakeshop that appears to largely rehash old claims. The State of Colorado abandoned similar ones just a few months ago. So this latest attack by Autumn Scardina looks like yet another desperate attempt to harass cake artist Jack Phillips. And it stumbles over the one detail that matters most: Jack serves everyone; he just cannot express all messages through his custom cakes," Phillips' attorney said in a statement Monday.
This latest lawsuit bypasses the state of Colorado and requests a trial by jury instead.
If I wasn’t suspicious, I’d think they were being targeted by the gays.
Dox the accuser.
Let nature take its course.
It’s far past time to make these folks suffer a bit.
(Not suggesting the manner of suffering. Just sayin’.)
He perceptively beat the homosexual movement so they want their “revenge”.
We need to rethink our legal system.
Winning doesn’t seem to matter. They will just beat you to death with failed lawsuits.
It shouldn’t be allowed.
If we had a “loser pays” system here it would cut down on a great many of these nuisance suits.
Bingo!
These people illustrate the reason that we should never have abandoned the practice of tar and feathers.
Lawfare is the term you are looking for, and it is certainly being employed here.
This makes a mockery of the justice system, and will ultimately make people think about going extra-judicial in response. This is not a good thing.
This person is going out of its way to try and make something as patently offensive as possible.
I wonder is it would invite its grandmother over to celebrate with that cake throbbing away.
Isn’t ALL business about discrimination? It means you make distinctions and then make decisions based on those distinctions.
More and more this is all the left stands for: Those who do not do as they are told must be destroyed!
One Canadian columnist gives his perspective: For more than twenty years I have been writing against the human rights commissions, which have quasi-legal powers that should be offensive to the citizens of any free country. They are kangaroo courts, in which the defendants right to due process is withdrawn. They reach judgments on the basis of no fixed law. Moreover [in addition to heavy fines], the process is the punishment in these star chambersfor simply by agreeing to hear a case, they tie up the defendant in bureaucracy and paperwork, and bleed him for the cost of lawyers, while the person who brings the complaint, however frivolous, stands to lose nothing.
https://www.thebereancall.org/content/homosexuality-and-reign-terror
Would the Stalking Law apply here?
“(2) Cause that person to suffer substantial emotional distress by placing that person in fear of death, bodily injury, or CONTINUED HARASSMENT [my emphasis], and that in fact causes that person substantial emotional distress.”
Yep.
Take off the gloves
It seems the baker is being harassed by this individual. Has he thought about a restraining order?
Is it possible to counter sue for damages? It seems to me if you can get some legal standing that you could force a large punitive award from not only the individuals, but the city as well, which would discourage future abuses of legal power.
The baker should see about obtaining a restraining order against this individual.
As a side note, if this crap is allowed to continue, there is going to come a day when the bully gets punched in the nose. The bully isn't going to like that day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.