I think the Supreme Court, not the protestors, gets dibs on the final say.
And the earlier arguments here were the protests were protected speech and that the statute was faulty.
There are also the applicability issues. I am too lazy to go back and look at it, so the goodle iirc.
To begin with, they are parading up and down the sidewalks. So long as they are not parked in front of a private home, or blocking the streets, no law can apply. It is a public right of way.
Courts have ruled stationary protests directly in front of private residences in general can be banned. Note they are carefully avoiding that.
Also, while moot given the above, the context of this particular law is about protesting at court houses or judges homes with the intent of obstructing justice or influencing a verdict in a criminal trial.