OK, if I (finally) understand what you just posted, this is a no win situation for Walgreen’s.
Ignore the law on the books, they're in trouble with the law, and will end up in court. Ignore the contradicting executive order, and I imagine they could be hauled into court for ignoring the order.
Walgreen’s first obligation is to it's owners, the stockholders. Management evidently decided that the least risky path to follow was to follow the (illegal) executive order. Given the contradicting situation set up by the government, they're fulfilling their duty to stockholders
What I'm not understanding in all this is why some want to punish Walgreen's for being caught in situation beyond their control, and taking the rational path out. It's like expelling a student after he's jumped by a bully.
The more I read about this case the more convinced I am that there are two bullies involved. The state, and whoever it is that's leading the charge to punish Walgreen's for reacting in a rational mannner.
Remember this is not a law passed by the Legislature but a rule by executive fiat.