I would surmise that it is highly unlikely that the USSC would overturn this case considering that both the original judge and the appellate court are in agreement regarding the law's constitutionality.
Then..., if that's the case, all the Supreme Court needed to do was to refuse to take the case ... end of story ... :-)
....and then there’s Article IV, Section 4 of our Constitution to back up the lower court’s decisions.
Isn't the case brought to one judge and they convince the Court to take the case? If that's true it would be interesting to find out which judge convinced the Court to hear the case.
To be honest I'm surprised that they didn't. I'm not aware of any particularly tricky legal issues with the law. I thought the grounds for challenging it were awfully weak, and it progressed past the original judge and appellate court rather quickly.
I guess some of the justices felt the need to hear the case. It could be because they are skeptical of the law, or it could be that they want to set down a precedent on such laws that would be binding across the nation, not just within the jurisdiction of that particular appeals court.