Advertisements

Leftists on Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission drop discrimination charge against Christian baker

By Jon Dougherty

After harassing him incessantly for years and losing a case of discrimination against Christian baker Jack Phillips, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission filed new allegations against almost immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against them last year.

But now, after additional evidence has emerged, the Leftists on the commission have dropped the new charges of discrimination against him and have decided to instead call a truce. According to the Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative legal-defense group representing Phillips, the commission abandoned the case after new evidence of their religious bias emerged:

The fact that one commissioner called Phillips a “hater” on Twitter was already publicly known. But a Colorado state legislator recently disclosed that he spoke in November 2018 to a current commissioner who expressed the belief that “there is anti-religious bias on the Commission.”

And just last week, ADF attorneys uncovered statements from a 2018 public meeting in which two commissioners voiced their support for comments that a previous commissioner, Diann Rice, made in 2015. Those comments, which the U.S. Supreme Court sternly condemned in its ruling in favor of Phillips last year, called religious freedom “a despicable piece of rhetoric.”

At the June 22, 2018, public meeting, members of the commission discussed the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling. During that discussion, Commissioner Rita Lewis said, “I support Commissioner Diann Rice and her comments. I don’t think she said anything wrong.”

Later, Commissioner Carol Fabrizio added, “I also very much stand behind Commissioner Rice’s statements…. I was actually proud of what she said, and I agree with her…. I’m almost glad that something the Commissioner said ended up public and used, because I think it was the right thing.” 




“After careful consideration of the facts, both sides agreed it was not in anyone’s best interest to move forward with these cases,” Attorney General Phil Weiser said on behalf of the commission, according to Fox31 in Denver.

“The larger constitutional issues might well be decided down the road, but these cases will not be the vehicle for resolving them. Equal justice for all will continue to be a core value that we will uphold as we enforce our state’s and nation’s civil rights laws,” he added.

Whatever. The fact is, the commission was harassing Phillips after the Supreme Court ruled his refusal to bake a cake for a gay wedding in 2012 was protected by his First Amendment religious freedom rights.

The commission was acting on a new ‘tip’ given to it by a Left-wing lawyer who tried to set Phillips up immediately after the high court’s ruling in June 2018, leading Phillips to sue the state and then-Gov. John Hickenlooper, who has recently jumped into the Democratic race for the 2020 presidential nomination.

Fox31 reported further:

The lawsuit said on the same day as the Supreme Court decision, an attorney asked Phillips to create a cake designed pink on the inside and blue on the outside as a way to celebrate a gender transition from male to female.

Phillips declined because the cake would have expressed messages about sex and gender identity that conflict with his religious beliefs, according to Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Phillips.

Less than a month later, the state found probable cause to believe state law requires Phillips to create the requested gender-transition cake.

As part of the deal, Phillips has also agreed to end his federal lawsuit.

Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter — Click here!


Advertisements

1 Comment on "Leftists on Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission drop discrimination charge against Christian baker"

  1. Time for a Slapp-Back Lawsuit: “A SLAPPback is essentially a malicious prosecution lawsuit, which claims damages for being subject to a maliciously filed lawsuit. This could include damages for emotional distress and punitive damages. In the past, juries in some SLAPPback suits have ordered SLAPP filers to pay large amounts of damages to the original SLAPP target.”

Have something to say?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: