That's the way the case should have gone down. But the USSC cherry-picked the case, and then a "sharply divided" court (to use a liberal phrase) said the real problem was the people of that state still had this dumb law on their books.The court then declared all similar laws across the country unconstitutional. They used the "privacy clause" (which must exist only in the shadows of the emanations of the penumbra of the Constitution) to void disagreeable (to them) state laws.
The danger comes from activist Supreme Courts (you need only five activists on the bench) from using this new tool again. Did the police find untaxed cigarettes in the privacy of your home? Void all state taxes on tobacco. Find an unregistered machinegun in the privacy of your home? Void the National Firearms Act. Privacy of the home requires all laws that run afoul of it to be voided across the country.
Now I wouldn't mind having stupid tax and gun laws declared unconstitutional, but this new tool is just too dangerous to use. The Supreme Court has just announced that it can be bullied into finding new rights that please those with the loudest voices, which are the liberals. A hell of a way to run a railroad, or a court.