Every legal challenge to a law can be based upon different technicalities. SCOTUS has already knocked down one legal challenge to this law once already.
I am not familiar with the two challenges if they are presenting two distinct reasons to challenge the law. Itโs possible but it could just be lawfare to keep the issue alive.
Take the case of the Baker in Colorado. Heโs been sued by the state on civil rights violations three times.
People will come in and request a cake for a same sex marriage or coming out party. He does not refuse to make them the cake. But on religious grounds he cannot decorate the cake saying what they which him to put on it.
Heโs been all the way to SCOTUS twice already and they have overturned the lower courts conviction both times.
The AG of Colorado just hit him again.
Itโs a very hard thing to defend. SCOTUS has upheld his right to withhold his creative talent when it goes against his religious convictions. And Colorado just turns around and hits him with the same charge again.
Theyโre purposely just trying to ruin him now financially.
Itโs so bad justice Thomas actually intimidated this behavior of constantly trying to re-litigate the same issue over and over might need some form of censure.
Same as the mandates, there has been no change in any laws and state and federal law specifically states on religious or medical exemptions the only grounds which a employer may reject them are if the request puts an undo financial burden on the employer.
Thatโs it
But because we selectively recognize and uphold laws in different cases the laws mean nothing.
Itโs just power not justice.