The court does what a court is supposed to do: hear the arguments and determine if your case is meeting the requirements for the law to apply. Let's be honest, that was just to make the process more difficult... The old law was inhumane. That's why change was in order.

And for the quote part: the article pretends that it's a quote and then attributes it to multiple people (how did that happen? Did they speak all at once or something?) without even naming them. This does not give me confidence in the translation. I might get what the argument was supposed to be, but I'm not going to give it any interpretation at this point.