You are correct.
I found it interesting that the split on the constitutional question was so marked.
The law is not an exact science.
Especially not appellate law, which is outcome-based, not precedent based. The judge picks the outcome he wants, then carfts an argument (often misapplying precedent by cherry-picking) that reaches the desired outcome.
At the SCOTUS level, law is almost purely a political activity, due to corruption of the function over the past 4 or 5 generations.
Trial courts are just as bad, party out of pure incompetence, and partly out of the fact that erroneous trial decisions are expensive to appeal, and the trial judges know it. IOW, they know they are free to make mistakes, even deliberate ones, and the only consequence is being reversed.