Here is my stab at an objective take on this.
The white house should not have referred to this case before it was better confirmed.
It might be true or it might not be true.
Obviously they did use it because of the emotional power of talking about a raped 10 year old.
But the laws that were being objected to are the same regardless.
The right wing plays this game of seeking possibly flawed details to destroy the other side.
But again the laws are in effect regardless of whether the story of this case is true or not and they are highly objectionable laws.
So the political process of the white house can be legitimately criticized but that's all.