That's not what he said. He was speaking rhetorically, of course he doesn't want tyrants. But its not the courts job to step into something that is so obviously a local matter. Its something that should of been done by referendum, and should the court ask why this was done, say that this was done out of the democratic process. It should have been voted on by the people, not regulated by the state.
If you think it isn't the federal court's job to hear cases alledging a violation of the 1st amendment establishment clause, under the doctrine of "incorporation" under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, then you need a refresher course in Constitutional law.
More to the point, if not the courts, who then, is to protect the public against the tyranny of the majority? Hypothetically, what if local voters elect public officials to violate your constitutional rights by outlawing YOUR church, to what legal authority will you appeal for relief? Remember, the majority of local voters favored this action; that's why it is called the "tyranny of the majority."