The court does say that in the particular kicircumstances of h phillip was treated, his religious views didnt get the respect of the commission that initially ruled against him. He cites Commission Members that said appeared to be dismissive or hostile to Jack Phillips religious views. The 13r50eSupreme Court this w marred as soon as the Commission Said those things. All the Court Decision today says is, because of the way Jack Phillips was treated below, he wins. But the decision also says, were not expressing a view about the larger issue that made this case so interesting. Which is, can other bakers, florists, people who print wedding invitations, who provide services, people who sing at weddings, play the organ, do the deejay services, all those businesses, can they refuse to serve samesex couples . Has written all the important gay rights rulings here from the Supreme Court, including the 2015 ruling on samesex marriage. With that in mind, he basically is saying, we have to keep t
the president. whether the president can pardon himself or whether mueller can subpoena the president is through litigation, right, not through talking heads or a advocacy letters. the subpoena question, we come close toring it in ways. one, in the nixon case, in the early 70s, the supreme court said there is no executive privilege that would protect documents that have been subpoenaed from the president. many years later, in the clinton v jones case , the court said that a president is sugsceptibl to being deposed in a case. neither of those precisely answers the question, but it gives us insight into how a court may think about it. my guess is you can subpoena a president. the president must answer the questions of the grand jury. chuck, if you can, at this point, why doesn t bob mueller just do it? while there s complete silence on bob mueller s side while he s