Do you think judicial activists are always going to come right now and say "We don't care what the law says--neener neener"!? Of course they'll try to claim they're working within the framework of the very laws they cravenly ignore.
So, what type of judicial activism do you see here? You're saying all of the 20 or so courts that have heard this case are engaging in judicial activism?
I think, for a lot of Freepers, "judicial activism" simply means "a court decision we don't like."