This is completely correct. The Court basically ducked the core issue of whether or not you can force to bake an LGBTQ cake. Instead, it struck down the decision of the Colorado commission because of anti-religious statements made by some commissioners during the course of the hearing. Essentially, they said "regardless of whether or not you can force someone to bake that cake, you can't make a decision based on blanket anti-religious bias." Of course, the very predictable result of that was for the Colorado commission to go after him again, and just not make the same kind of statements on the record.
The Supreme Court sometimes does that -- decides a case on very narrow grounds to duck a controversial issue. They are particularly likely to do that when there doesn't appear to be a majority willing to sign on to any particular decision. So rather than issuing a plurality opinion, they duck the main issue and decide it on a narrow ground.
As I said above, the problem is that while he won his first case at the Supreme Court, the decision they made was so narrow that it didn't address the core issue. I suspect that the fly in the ointment at that time was Anthony Kennedy, who is generally pro-religious but also pro-gay. He has since been replaced by Kavanaugh, who has not show the same pro-gay bias. So, if it gets up to the Supreme Court again, it is very likely that the Court will finally decide the core issue squarely. And if that happens, then there no longer will be any doubt, and the we'll all finally have the answer to the question that we should have had years ago.
But this result -- him getting sued again -- was as certain to happen as the sun rising in the east when the Supreme Court refused to address the core issue the first time around.
QFT. The SCOTUS ducked, and left Mr. Phillips vulnerable to folks trying to make a name for themselves.
The SCOTUS's abandonment of its responsibility is shameful. What the Court should be doing is creating certainty, rather than uncertainty and obfuscation that prevents our cultural wounds from healing. Now everyone knows that my opinion of the merits of this issue differs from most others here. But I would welcome a clear ruling by the SCOTUS that folks like Mr. Phillips have the liberty to discriminate on the basis of their religious views even if I may disagree with it. Whatever I may think of Mr. Phillips, he doesn't deserve to be put through the wringer again. Tell him what he can and cannot do, and let him move forward with his life and his business.
