agree but to a limited extent...the SCOTUS has reached a limited decision which led to a "postponement" of a full hearing.  that in and of itself sets the stage for arguments which center around the definition of several of the used terms in the limited decision.  the resultant number of definitions could equal the number of viewers or protagonists.  so if anyone of Chin's ilk wishes to contest the "limited-ness" of the decision, they would have to clearly define almost every word - which could lead to an abundance of permutations - defeating the purpose of the contest.  that essentially would set the tack, veracity, and strength of the challenger's position.  this would give the SCOTUS the opportunity to limit any future broad interpretational attack of the original ruling.  this has the further potential of giving the SCOTUS a chance to stand pat and require all future challenges to be heard on a CASE-BY-CASE BASIS - which might be the best result.  right?