Conservative Supreme Court reasoning swings like an old man's flaccid balls

I see complete disingenuous reasoning comparing the moral cake case and Trimp's Muslim ban. On the first case they gave it to the cake company because they took into account comments from one of the judges who revealed a bias. But in the trump Muslim ban, they didn't didn't take into account Trump's racist intent in his tweets. Does this leave an opening? I thought the Supreme Court judges were supposed to be consistent?