Weirdly I think this is not constructed, hunters are moderately heavy users of public lands and land rights are pretty important to that group. I believe they are entitled to enter public land and at the same time respect land right usage of private land owners, and the ladder is a discreet and harmless way to access public lands. The argument that they intersected the airspace of private land momentarily, with no damages, likely falls under accidental or unintentional violation.
That said, the goal is to access additional public land. I struggle to see how the supreme court will fall on the side of private landowners and might even punitively add that vehicular access to private land might be allowed in the future. Right now it's only "on foot". This ruling has an enormous body of evidence and research behind it, this isn't a small issue for a large number of people; they just don't overlap much with the HN community very much.
That said, the goal is to access additional public land. I struggle to see how the supreme court will fall on the side of private landowners and might even punitively add that vehicular access to private land might be allowed in the future. Right now it's only "on foot". This ruling has an enormous body of evidence and research behind it, this isn't a small issue for a large number of people; they just don't overlap much with the HN community very much.