In an attempt to make lemonade out of the basket of lemons handed them by the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday, state party leaders are suggesting they have grounds for a future challenge to the Top Two primary.

A reading of the decision suggests otherwise.

In upholding the Top Two initiative, the court said opponents had not made a case that the law is unconstitutional on its face. And since the legal challenge came before the state could use the system in an actual election, there was no way of telling if it would be constitutional "as applied."

Both Justice Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts raised the possibility that the state could run a Top Two election in such a way as to infringe on the parties' rights. That is, the state could somehow suggest that candidates are the official candidates of the parties, rather than candidates who "prefer" one party over the other.

That was enough for GOP Chairman Luke Esser to say this:

"Though we would have preferred to win outright today, the U.S. Supreme Court offered a very narrow, technical ruling that makes it clear the Top Two Primary may still be found unconstitutional. The court's opinion clearly imposes a high standard on the State of Washington to devise a primary ballot that is “designed in such a manner that no reasonable voter” would conclude that a candidate who declares a preference for a party, without that party’s approval, is a member of that party."

But here is what Thomas actually wrote:

"... we must ... ask whether the ballot could conceivable be printed in such a way as to eliminate the possibility of widespread voter confusion and with it the perceived threat to the First Amendment."

He then adds, "It is not difficult to conceive of such a ballot."

And this, "We are satisfied that there are a variety of ways in which the state could implement I-872 that would eliminate any real threat of voter confusion."

Chief Justice Roberts was a bit more skeptical about the chances for a constitutional implementation, but not by much:

"If the ballot is designed in such a manner that no reasonable voter would believe that the candidates listed there are nominees or members of, or otherwise associated with, the parties the candidates claimed to 'prefer,' the I-872 primary system would likely pass constitutional muster."

Rather than saying they will wait to see how the law in put into practice, the justices gave the state a road map for implementing Top Two in a way that will meet their approval.