colorado, involving a baker who wouldn t bake a cake to celebrate the same-sex wedding of two men. now, in that case, the supreme court sent the case back to colorado, saying that there was some infirmities in the way that the colorado civil rights, human rights commission dealt with the case and seemed to show some religious animous. none of that was present in the oregon case, though. exactly what the oregon courts are supposed to make of this, i don t know. my guess would be that they ll take another look and once again rule against the oregon bakery and the oregon baker could be back here again. i m not sure what s gained except perhaps some time to look if other rulings like this come along. in the second case, the supreme court declined to wipe out at least 150 years of law, saying that it doesn t violate the protection against double jeopardy if you re charged once in state court and then again in federal court for the same crime. i think most people realize the
at the poor people s moral action congress presidential forum. more coverage on velshi & ruhle next hour. final weeks of the term. justice correspondent pete williams joins us with details on noteworthy cases. pete, take us through these two critical rulings, the first regarding that oregon baker. yeah. this is a bit of a surprise. a bakery in oregon that refused to make a cake for a lesbian commitment ceremony. owners of the bakery said that would violate their religious beliefs, that their cakes are inherently expressive. that it would violate their freedom of expression. they lost when the state sued them, in the lower courts. they appealed to the supreme court. and today the supreme court wipe ed out those lower court rulings against them. that is a partial victory for them. but it also sent the case back to the lower courts with instructions to re take another look at the case in light of the supreme court s ruling two years ago in an almost identical case from
unfortunately, i would like to point out, i really see this as identity policy issue on the side of the the right.ç as we want to be treated like everybody else. the golden rule. i do not want to be turned away and discriminated against. this is not about cake. be it s wanting to be treated the same as everybody else. we would likeould to stop about being singled out. i happen to be a army ranger, my ranger but he never treated me any differently than any of my peers as long as i shall find and held my ranger status, nobody cared. jason: do you believe robert, rob and i should say, do you feel there any room for religious liberty if this is alf long-standing belief in the religious liberty, why can tc they make this decision? a that s a great question. theree is a case in colorado, where customer it wanted to make a cake in theake shape of a bibe
before the court, correct? that is correct. this oregon case, the client case, will be a footnote that the united state supreme court is considering the cake shop caseç and before supreme court, sup the justices, kennedy and roberts, they were talking about where the tensionh exists in the tug-of-war between the two sides. how they are grappling with that issue. unfortunately, the oregon appellate court avoided that issue and i instead, shoehorned mrs. klein s artistry into the public doctrine in terms of a brick-and-mortar business. the real discrimination here, not recognizing that the masterpieces that she created withs her hands her form of pary expression, and she s entitled to the artistry especially in so far as expression of herç also
issuee i want to talk to you about before we say goodbye to you. i want to get your reaction about a repjdñ out tonight overr an alleged incident between you and a passenger on a flight togh milwaukee.t that took place over a year agos milwaukee journal sentinel is reporting the fbi got involved, a document that i ve actually read exonerating you for the department of justice. while there are no charges, the passenger filed a civil lawsuito against you. i want to get your take. it s a frivolous lawsuit and yet to be adjudicated, so i cannot say too much. it s a fake news story. i do not know how donald trump feels, i know how he feels. i get the sense of the matter, they found no wrongdoing. that case is closed, and i was informed of that last may. here weç are in december, and they are trying to rehash it with lies interwoven in between to make it seem like this isne somethingw. new. there was no wrongdoing.