Most of the viable Republican candidates recognize that there’s no real way to defend Davis without backing themselves into an illogical corner. Donald Trump, who’s been pretending not to be a New York City social liberal, must think this woman is a loon who needs to get on with it. “The decision came down from the Supreme Court,” he said, advising her to let her deputies do the dirty licensing. Jeb Bush effectively said the same, emphasizing the importance of her oath, as did Sen. Marco Rubio. Gov. Scott Walker, who can’t give a clear explanation of anything beyond what he eats for lunch, spit out something about how “as president, he would enforce the law”—intended, strangely enough, as a defense of Davis…

There’s an ample amount of polling evidence out there to confirm that no one cares what Jindal says about anything. He won’t be on the main stage at the Sept. 16 debate in California. But Huckabee will. Cruz will. And Paul, who’s railed on about the violation of Davis’ liberty, will. What if Davis is still in jail by then—or at least the story is still fresh enough in the news for it to be a topic? You will see these candidates throwing it in the faces of Trump, Bush, Rubio, and Walker. And their “on the one hand” responses won’t play well during a television melee as grand as a Grand Old Party Presidential Debate.

Davis’ well-plotted martyrdom has thrust into the Republican presidential race its first difficult, post-Obergefell test of how to negotiate the new law of the land with protection of religious liberties. Questions about the rights of wedding vendors to refuse servicing same-sex ceremonies were softballs in the context of a Republican presidential primary: These are private businesses that can do whatever they want. Here we have a government official, though, with no legal justification for what she’s doing, but all the right feelings that the candidates hope to tap into. Who wants to be the one to tell her to get over it?