The more that comes out about that Supreme Court wedding website case that was decided last month, the more it stinks.
It should never have been granted a hearing due to standing. But that aside, it now turns out that not only did she misrepresent that she was asked to design a website for a gay couple (she wasn't), but she claimed she was prevented to design ANY wedding websites, which also turns out to have been a lie.
How can a legal case get to that level without the pertinent facts being checked and re-checked?