Relying upon a legal framework to protect us from government abuses, when the arbiters of judgment were appointed by said government, is folly. Many of us have been saying this for decades and simply smile and shake our heads (in a saddened sort of way) whenever people appear surprised and "outraged" that so many judges defer to government authority, justifying it with asinine and contradictory statements.

This case moving to the US Supreme Court is no slam-dunk either. There is every possibility for the Justices to "correct" the wording or underlying basis for the mandates as part of their ruling in favor (recall the two pivotal Obamacare cases where Justice Roberts did this, in contradiction to oral arguments and recorded legislative text).