There's a difference between what one might criticize and what criteria the judge is using to make their ruling. The response was specifically to the claim that

There's a difference between what one might criticize and what criteria the judge is using to make their ruling. The response was specifically to the claim that that portion of the proposition should not be criticized for the inclusion of a 7/8ths vote for an amendment. Also, unusually generous? In that very same thread, it was mentioned many propositions include a provision for amendment with a 3/4ths vote. And this proposition also (unconstitutionally, apparently) limited how the whole thing could be amended. Unusually generous seems to be a far cry from a reasonable description. It was both harder to amend than many propositions, and included a novel attempt to restrict the ways in which it could be changed. Just because it could have been impossible to amend does not make it unusually generous.