The only reason these guys put themselves through such pretzel logic contortions is because of the way they rule, and want to rule.
They look at each case as a way to “shape society” (instead of how the law applies to the case).
So, they take the case, decide what social outcome they want to occur based on their ruling, rule that way,
THEN SEARCH FOR JUSTIFICATION wherever they can find it.
Most court decisions these days involve what I call "legalistic back-filling" (from my civil engineering background). The judges go into the case knowing exactly how they intend to vote, then go about building a rationale for their decision. If there is no sound legal basis for their decision, they'll simply find more material to pile behind the retaining wall.