Simply because the NCSC is stacked with knuckleheads who adjudicate from the far right. It was NCSC who overturned Packingham’s win in the Court of Appeals with their absurd reasoning that NC’s Social Networking ban was narrowly tailored. To be fair, it was not a unanimous decision; there was a lone voice of reason. But overall: schmucks. (Full disclosure: I identify mostly as republican but am more and more moderate on social issues every day.)
And let’s be clear on SCOTUS’s ruling to begin with: They did not rule that NC’s SBM program was unconstitutional. They ruled that the program amounts to “a search”. The 4th amendment protects against UNREASONABLE searches. SCOTUS did not consider whether NC’s SBM program met the criteria for reasonable-ness. Instead the case was remanded back to the lower court to decide that. The NC COA decided in the Grady case that the state did not show that the search being sought was reasonable. That decision was handed down earlier this year. TBH, I am unsure if the state has appealed that decision though I would be surprised if they have not. Anyway… the ruling in the above-mentioned article relies heavily on the precedent set earlier this year in the second Grady decision. The only way, IMO, that this decision stands without further appeal is if Grady II is set in stone as a precedent. And even then, the state could argue that the facts of this case are so different from Grady that it warrants consideration separate from Grady.
NC is losing court battles in bunches lately. The AG’s office must be desperate for a win. If they see this as an easy one (or even just a popular one) they will pursue it.