Health, your posts are devoid of any knowledge of legal or constitutional principles.
To address just to of your points-
Why did the toevaniks that brought the case have standing? In the California case, the case was not brought by Toevaniks. It was brought by people who just didn’t like that the law was overturned by the district court.
As for what would happen if the democratic process determined that social policy should require everyone to be mechalel Shabbos, that is precisely what is protected by the First Amendment, so it would be invalidated by the Supreme Court if it were to even pass in the first place.