Pretty interesting case.
9-0. Plus 3 concurring opinions. In a court of law that what is called a slam dunk.
Well, he won and now he gets to go back to court.
Makes me wonder how much of this is going on around the country that people aren't fighting.
California legislation is a cesspool, and its appplication is almost always an abomination of jursprudence. It's pretty sad that presenting a case in CA with any chance of impartiality from a court requires the Supreme Court to step in. This is a great example of how every level of government (local, state, federal), their laws, and their application should be always be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism, instead of the presumption of constitutionality.
While this case is technically a "win for the little guy", all the opinion/order said is that the California Court of Appeal erred in applying the law, and that the lower court must now revisit the matter in the proper context. It doesn't really say that the "traffic study fee is too high", or should even be reduced, given an adequate amount of legal gymnastics. Kavanaugh and Gorsuch allude to this in their concurring opinion(s).
Gorsuch seems to regularly point out how poor (incomplete?) legal reasoning/application is really at the heart of many problems today. This is foreshadowing of just how sick, broken, or completely lost the judicial system really is.