So basically the judge is just making up the law as he goes along. His ruling is total nonsense, but since you can always find some vague, faint precedent for anything if you go back far enough, the judge just has to grab one and claim it’s germane here, even though it isn’t.So let me get this straight. The highest ranking executive in a very populous state wants to ban the ability of his own government to mandate something. Seems legitimate, like he wants to limit the overreach of the apparatus he's in charge of.
But, the school boards (much weaker in terms of political power) of a few municipalities within his state want to have government tyranny enforced on all children with a mandate that many consider incredibly dangerous to one's health and well-being. A judge agrees with them making the most powerful executive of the apparatus lose and tyranny and oppression, due to a few local sociopaths and a corrupt judge, will stand.