According to the majority, while courts may set aside whole statutes or provisions, they may not “excise individual applications of a concededly valid statutory scheme.”

Is it just me, or did he just say anyone challenging a law before the Supreme Court must show not that the application is unconstitutional, but the entirety of the law and/or provision itself? I’m not a constitutional scholar, but doesn’t this raise the bar for judicial review a few notches skyward?