Mitspa isn't just looking at the Bible. He's looking and legal precedent. This largely misunderstood notion of separation never really existed in our Constitution which is the ultimate law of the land.
With their decision, the Supreme Court, has ignored the origins of their profession and the foundations of justice. You ignore notions of justice as well. If there is no higher Law to defend outside the parameters of the law, then we have an interesting ethical quandary.
Suppose for a moment the Supreme Court declares it a constitutional right to kill widows after the death of their husband. Would you not be against this measure? Would you not refuse to obey? Would you not view it as unjust?
I understand legal precedent. I also understand the certain times throughout history where the Supreme court felt it had to go against that legal precedent...such as with segregation..and discrimination..and I agree with you, that we do have "an interesting ethical quandry" that results from God's law being separated from man's law...but this is nothing new. As for the notion of separation "never really existing in our constitutions", well, that is completely debatable, but I'm not even going to go there. The truth in that, I believe, truly lies somewhere in the middle of both "sides" of the issue, as it often usually does in issues such as this.
As for the analogy of the supreme court "declaring a constitutional right to kill widows after the death of their husband", my answer to you is, of course not. I would not kill a widow....and yes...I would probably be jailed for it. Would I like it? no. Would I give all the praise and glory to God? Would I have to take God at His word that "All things work together for the good of those in Christ Jesus"? yes. Now....let me ask you something.
Suppose that the Supreme court declared that "all unkind words spoken in anger...(such as a slip of the tongue)" shall carry a 20 year prison term...and it just so happens you are having a really bad moment and the S word or H word, or D word slips...or maybe its not you, but rather the unsaved neighbor next door. First, would you deem that ruling "unjust"? and second, would you even be able to guarantee that you will obey?