DENVER (CBS4) – Attorneys for a Denver woman greased the pan for yet another legal battle against a Lakewood bakery already burned around the edges from a series of heated civil rights fights. Jack Phillips, owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop, refused in 2012 to bake a wedding cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins, a same-sex couple from Denver, on the basis of his religious beliefs.

Jack Phillips in Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood (credit: Matthew Staver/For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

That case rose through the court system, culminating in a year ago in a 7-2 decision from the United States Supreme Court partially in favor of Phillips. The justices did not rule on the larger issue of whether businesses can invoke religious objections to refuse service to gays or lesbians, but did decide the bakery owner had been subjected to anti-religious bias by a state civil rights agency.

Jack Phillips at his shop (credit: CBS)

The latest lawsuit was filed Wednesday in Denver District Court on behalf of Autumn Scardina by attorneys Paula Greisen and John McHugh.

Scardina had filed a previous lawsuit against Phillips following her request for a cake – an order she placed the day of the SCOTUS ruling. Previous reports say Scardina’s order was for a cake celebrating her gender transition.

Dave Mullins (left) and Charlie Craig (Photo by AAron Ontiveroz/The Denver Post via Getty Images)

Thursday, Greisen called it an order for a birthday cake.

Regardless, Scardina’s initial lawsuit was not successful.

Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood (credit: CBS)

“The second round was dismissed, frankly, without our input,” Greisen told CBS4. “They disregarded Ms. Scardina and the merits of her claim.”

The newest lawsuit claims Phillips discriminated against Scardina and used deceptive and unfair trade practices.

“The dignity of all citizens in our state needs to be honored. Masterpiece Cakeshop said before the Supreme Court they would serve any baked good to members of the LGBTQ community. It was just the religious significance of it being a wedding cake,” Griesen said. “We don’t believe they’ve been honest with the public.”

In the complaint’s text, Scardina’s attorneys cite testimony in previous court proceedings: “Mr. Phillips, for himself and on behalf of Masterpiece Cakeshop, confirmed that they would happily make the exact same cake requested by Ms. Scardina for other customers.”

Phillips, contacted at the bakery Thursday, said he suspected further legal activity was cooking.

A formal statement was later distributed on his behalf by Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Jim Campbell, whose firm represented Phillips in the Supreme Court case:

“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 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.”

People rally for Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cake in Colorado, outside the US Supreme Court before Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission is heard on December 5, 2017 in Washington, DC.
(credit: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images)

When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed anti-religious bias when it sanctioned Phillips, Phillips filed a federal lawsuit against the state and its Commission.

Subsequently, both sides agreed to drop all litigation and pay their own attorney fees.

This latest lawsuit demands payment of unspecified damages through a jury trial.



Comments (29)
  1. harvey Jones says:

    Jake: Put in your material ” I have the right to place Biblical Gospel or Gospel related scriptures on any product I produce.” You have a command to give the Gospel, make the cake and put the Gospel on the cake.

  2. B Wallace says:

    7-2 decision by the Supreme Court is not a partial decision. The fact that this insane case went to the higher court in America, is beyond absurd. What a waste of time, energy and money. This gentleman also will not make cakes for Halloween or anything disparaging against others. In this equation, who are the haters? This sound like similar witch hunts that are done in communist countries. In the end, God protects the righteous.

  3. Linda Peereboom says:

    Psalms 62:7 (TPT)
    God’s glory is all around me! His wrap-around presence is all I need, for the Lord is my Savior, my hero, and my life-giving strength.

    Psalms 27:1 (TPT)
    The Lord is my revelation-light to guide me along the way; he’s the source of my salvation to defend me every day. I fear no one! I’ll never turn back and run from you, Lord; surround and protect me.

  4. Sharon Dutra says:

    I wonder why these cowards don’t go to moslem bakeries and ask for their stuff? So Steven Crowder put a video out about it:

  5. Justin Tyme says:

    Sick of rainbow thugs forcing their sexuality on everyone. Christians are the ones being persecuted. If you want more hate for gays, keep it up.

  6. Jason Edward Prather says:

    How many moselm bakeries have the lgbtetc crowd gone after for refusing to bake them a cake?! Why does the lgbtetc crowd get to get away with islamophobia?!

  7. Paul Van Why says:

    This is strictly harassment. They know the bakers stand before they enter the shop so it is just to harass the Baker.

  8. Missy Smith says:

    Let her go to a Muslim Bakery for her cakes. She can sue them. Or does the LBGTQRXPDQXYZ (LOL) cult have more respect for that “religion”?

  9. Why doesn’t this station, and the others, mention the ‘victim’, Autumn Scardina, owns Scardina Law Firm? While she persists on prosecuting Mr. Phillips, she actually is just trying to spitefully bankrupt him with nuisance claims. Petty and vindictive, a vile person.

  10. Michael Babbitt says:

    All they wanted was civil unions…. Remember? No, they want total control of your life.

  11. Craig Brueckman says:

    Let’s hear “the rest of the story”. Was is that she just went in, asked for a birthday cake and he refused? Or, did she request specific decorations or messages on the cake, that he refused?

    FWIW I wouldn’t blame him if he refused to serve her for anything. After she came in the first time, instigating to file a discrimination claim, I would tell her that based on her litigious attitude, she is not welcome in my store. Last I understood, that isn’t covered by any non-discrimination rules or laws.

  12. Cedar Harvey says:

    If Facebook and YouTube can refuse to provide services for people with the wrong ideology certainly this guy is allowed to refuse to bake a cake because of his religious beliefs.

  13. lol. It’s his bakery and it says in the bible, which is his religion which is in the bill of rights,You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. It’s his store. You are the people in the wrong. Oh, he won’t bake the cake for my gay wedding! I’ll sue him. Pathetic, your response to someone using their freedom is a lawsuit. They should call up Jussie, he knows all about fake hate crimes. You can pretend it’s okay. But deep down? You know you are weak, powerless and effeminate. :)

  14. Mitch Reed says:

    This attorney needs to be disbarred. She knows exactly what she’s doing, and it has been proven wrong before…Jack either needs to counter sue and get her for compensitory damages, or go for her disbarrment or both. Jack; enough is enough.

  15. David Senn says:

    You have a right as a private business owner to refuse service to anyone. If a man comes into my shop and I know he is a drug dealer or that he regularly beats his wife, I have to serve him? If Christians don’t get together and defend ourselves against this harassment and discrimination we will someday find ourselves wearing the yellow star.

  16. Joe Daigle says:

    The rainbows thugs just never stop trying to destroy Christians. Long ago, the battle changed from gaining acceptance in the straight community, which happened, to destroying Christianity, and only Christianity. Notice they aren’t suing Muslims who throw them off of buildings or behead them like some eastern countries do. Why didn’t this woman go to a Muslim bakery and order a cake? I’ll tell you why, she hadn’t taken flying lessons yet.

  17. Scott Crombie says:

    I agree with every one of these comments. It’s not about the cake. It’s about harassing Christians. The woman should be ashamed and so should her attorneys.

    1. Eric Boyd says:

      HE… is not a woman. HE is a disgusting, vile, confused and spiteful loser who has no business practicing law

  18. Curt Senka says:

    Enough already! They act like they are discriminated against, meanwhile its obvious they are looking for people and businesses to harrass. If I know in advance a particular business isn’t going to sell me something specific that I am looking for, I don’t go into that business and try to buy it.

  19. Michael Adkins says:

    This is how they operate. Find a venue with the anticipated negative response to a request and then sue to force compliance. Bask in the media spotlight and gain notoriety among your tribe.

  20. Barbara McGrew says:

    I am so sick of people believing that it is ok to torment Christians but everyone else is protected.

  21. Bob Ward says:

    It would so easy to go to another baker who has no misgivings of making you a birthday cake because you married your dog.

  22. This is nothing more than harassment.

  23. This is now clearly bigoted harassment against Phillips. These people don’t want “equality,” but superiority, and they will try to destroy everyone they can however they can in order to get it.

  24. Euan McDonald says:

    The complainants should be fined for harassment because that is what they are doing,

  25. Codswallop Hogwash says:

    Gad, give him a break. He owns the shop, receives no government funding of any kind. He should absolutely have the right to bake cakes for whom he pleases. That is a fundamental right. These attacks violate the freedom of being an American, and need to be stopped.

    1. People said the same about the lunch counter protests. Being gay is no more a choice than being black.

      1. A (@gskibum) says:

        Jim Crow laws were, well, laws. That issue was government-mandated discrimination. This is not a case of government-mandated discrimination.

        Furthermore, the plaintiff is free to purchase any item in the Masterpiece Cakeshop’s inventory.

        What is at issue here is the plaintiff wanting to conscript the defendant into performing labor that violates the defendant’s religious beliefs.

      2. Marjorie Willich says:

        Not even close little one

Leave a Reply