You are trying to comment on the Court’s view without knowing what this court will do. In other words, speculation based on a mostly moribund judiciary. You may be accurate on the Court’s view, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is history.
So, you missed the point.
The statement of profound concerns resides in the American population as reflected in pro se filings by brothers from Utah who haven’t given up, rather they soldiered on all the way to the US Supreme Court. What would drive people to this extreme?
The point also resides with the author, Professor of Law Tim Canova, who injects thoughts reflecting the mood of the American people.
This case doesn’t matter so much as what’s driving it. The Brunson Brothers reflect the thoughts, feelings, and concerns of a hundred million others.
History is a span of thousands of years.
Historical events span decades.
Court cases span months.
This case emerges as a small effect to an enormous historical event.
In light of Madison v. Marbury, I don’t know if a federal judge could ever get his or her mind the notion that the judicial branch can force the legislative or executive branch to take a specific action, or that a federal judge has the power to remove an individual in the legislative or executive branch from government service for failing to act when the law, fairly read, seems to require that action. The Separation of Powers issue just seems to be screaming out, saying: No bleepin’ way a federal judge has that power!