In a significant ruling, the Colorado Supreme Court delivered a long-awaited reprieve for Jack Phillips, the Christian baker who has been at the center of legal battles for over a decade. Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, had faced yet another lawsuit, this time for refusing to create a custom cake celebrating a transgender woman’s transition. However, the state’s high court dismissed the case on procedural grounds, bringing relief to Phillips and a victory for those who stand for religious liberty.

The case originated in 2017 when Autumn Scardina, a transgender attorney, filed an antidiscrimination lawsuit against Phillips after he declined to make a pink-and-blue cake to celebrate her gender transition. This wasn’t Phillips’ first legal battle—he became a household name after refusing to bake a same-sex wedding cake in 2012, a case that eventually landed in the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court ruled in Phillips’ favor, citing that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had displayed hostility toward his religious beliefs. Despite this victory, Phillips has remained under siege from activists and legal challenges.

Phillips’ legal team, led by Jake Warner from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), expressed their frustration at the continued harassment. “Enough is enough,” Warner declared. “Jack has been dragged through the courts for over a decade. It’s time to leave him alone.” Warner rightly pointed out that this case, like the previous one, revolves around Phillips’ refusal to create a cake with a message that contradicts his deeply held religious convictions. “Because that cake admittedly expresses a message, and because Jack cannot express that message for anyone, the government cannot punish Jack for declining to express it.”

The Colorado Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision was based on procedural grounds, ruling that Scardina had not exhausted all administrative avenues before filing her lawsuit. The court emphasized that it expressed no opinion on the merits of the case, focusing solely on the procedural missteps. Justice Melissa Hart, writing for the majority, noted that Scardina improperly bypassed the settlement process and filed directly in district court. While Scardina’s attorney, John McHugh, criticized the ruling, calling it a “procedural pass” for Phillips, many saw the decision as a welcome relief for a man who has become a target for progressive activists.

Critics of the lawsuit argue that this was not about discrimination, but about punishing Phillips for his Christian beliefs. Scardina’s own testimony revealed that she ordered the cake specifically to test Phillips’ willingness to serve LGBTQ+ patrons, further proving that this was a deliberate attempt to provoke legal action. In a country that prides itself on freedom of speech and religion, forcing a Christian baker to violate his conscience for a political stunt sets a dangerous precedent.

The case also highlights the weaponization of Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act, which forbids businesses from discriminating based on gender identity, sexual orientation, and other factors. However, as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Phillips’ previous case, there is a difference between denying service to someone based on who they are and refusing to endorse a specific message that contradicts one’s religious beliefs. Jack Phillips has always maintained that he serves all customers, but he will not create cakes that send messages in conflict with his faith.

As Phillips and his supporters celebrate this victory, it is clear that this ongoing legal battle is more than just about cakes. It is a fight to preserve the rights of religious Americans to live out their faith in the public square, without fear of government coercion. In a time where freedom of speech and religion are increasingly under threat, Jack Phillips’ case serves as a reminder that the First Amendment is not up for debate.

For now, Phillips can continue to run his business according to his values, but the battle for religious freedom is far from over.