I agree with you that the federal Judge would likely do just as you say (like the health insurance case) but I don't think it would be right. You certainly hit the nail on the head, though, that some rights are more vigorously protected by the judiciary than others. Recently there was a story about a man who was fired from a Catholic organization because (I think) he was active in Kerry's campaign. I think he may even have visited Kerry's website from work or something like that. Does anyone know if there was any legal action from the story? Sorry for the minimalist description, but maybe someone will remember better?
I think everyone would agree on the extremes. for example the employer cannot legally demand you do something outrageous such as do lap dances, or demand that you work 24 hours with no breaks.
Employees cannot be expected to have the freedom to bring vials of anthrax in their car even if it were legal.
Having a gun, and I personally don't care if it is loaded or not, is exercising a basic right. Employers don't have the luxury that regular property owners have of just demanding that it is my way of get off my property.
It it just about a necessity to have to bring your car to work. The employer should never be allowed to make demands which deprive us of basic rights unless he has an extraordinary reason for doing so. In this case he has no reason whatsoever.