It is a not-completely-frivolous argument in this procedural context, you could say. This is not the final determination in the case; it is just a question abou

It is a not-completely-frivolous argument in this procedural context, you could say. This is not the final determination in the case; it is just a question about whether the law can be enforced right now, while the case is pending. If the ISPs could show e.g. that there was significant harm to them and no harm to CA in temporarily barring enforcement of the law, then the judge might be obligated to rule in their favor. It’s more complicated than this, but this is the general idea anyway. It’s still a BS argument, to be clear, and good that the judge rejected it...