I don't understand your reasoning. Alot of judges looked at the Dred Scott case and Plessy v. Ferguson and the Koramatsu v. U.S., but that didn't make the decisions in those cases less abmominable than they were. More recently, multiple courts looked at the case of Gerald Amirault and repeatedly abrogated their duty to due justice in that case. So don't tell me that just because you get a bunch of lawyers in black robes looking at something, that they can't end up making a horrible mistake. Being a lawyer, you more than anyone else would should understand that and, as a result, you should have more of an open mind about the facts in this case.
And I have read each published opinion in this case and reached my own conclusions regarding how it has been handled. Sorry, but I don't see the conspiracy that many on this thread see.