Oh I agree 100% if there are other reasons they say later it will be questioned and rightfully so. They did it backwards and now made it harder for themselves.
My GUESS is though they already knew this and they had no real intentions of stopping CFA because legally they know they can't. I think they just wanted to expose CFA's bigoted stance and get press showing they are against these types of bigoted stances.
And this is a big reason why I now believe it was never anything more than political grandstanding.
Note that the initial announcement was made in front of tv cameras. Splashed all over the news. Everybody saw and heard it. Mission accomplished, so to speak.
Note also that any subsequent debate... with a few editorials here and there added, but not too common... was places like here at DP between relatively few politically-geeky people such as ourselves... hidden away from the masses. The vast majority pf people for whom the original message was intended aren't hearing the rational, Constitutional, and legal objections. No, they just heard the grandstanding, and that was pretty much it.
Note again that the subsequent backtracking regarding legal issues and the actual issuing of permits was done quietly and via relatively obscure press releases. No tv cameras for this. Oh no.
Essentially, they inflamed public opinion to their desired end result, then backtracked just enough to probably cover their butts in a potential future lawsuit, but left public opinion inflamed in their desired favor.
Why would you want to open a business where you are not welcome?
I'm not sure you understand that most businesses really don't care.
I worked for a company where Walmart was our primary client for over twenty years. This was a civil engineering firm, so we were intimately involved with their expansion process, not sales. We were directly involved with planning and approval processes, negotiating with cities, etc. Walmart has indeed been thwarted here and there, but it is rare. As a general rule, if only a city council objected, they'd ignore it and push through anyway. If "the masses" objected, there was a better chance that they'd actually cancel the store.
City councils are just 5/7/9 people, and contrary to intent, do not always represent the will of the people. Large businesses know this. Once the store is open, the city's opinion is pretty much irrelevant, and you don't get big by always being nice. "The masses" are actual potential customers, and are a better gauge of the community and potential sales base. If "the masses" object, then they take that as a sign that the store may not be profitable... which is really the only criteria.