[Deep_6]

Re:
"it is precisely within the legislative branch's authority to legislate as they did."

It was after-the-fact and reversed a court's opinion; it is not
Constitutional and will be stricken.

You are wrong.

Good night all.

[supercat]

It was after-the-fact and reversed a court's opinion; it is not Constitutional and will be stricken.

There is a long history, going back over 200 years, of legislators deciding to effectively reverse court decisions by passing laws so as to undermine them. That a law undoes a court decision is hardly a basis for declaring it unconstitutional; indeed, the ability for the legislature and executive to join together to override the judiciary is one of the essential checks and balances in the republic.

[malakhi]

It was after-the-fact

The constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws only applies to criminal law (Calder v. Bull). So this objection does not apply.

and reversed a court's opinion

No it didn't. Rather, it offered a new avenue of action.