No, that would be a strawman argument. Whatever legal principles are at stake here do not rise to a repudiation of law itself.
I certainly could have gotten his intent wrong, but for now his words have to stand as written, and the issue of the Rule of Law is both entirely relevant to this case and to current events in the US.
The more charitable interpretation of SubiculumCode's words, and the one that does not need to assume facts not in evidence, would be that "This is shit" should be taken to mean, "This is terrible news". Which would either way be a normal human reaction, and a valid opinion, despite your attempts to portray otherwise.
To be precise, the law and regulations were appropriate decades ago, when it protected workers, but in its current form, oppressed them into long underpaid, non-livable, labor. In my view, the Obama administration change in regulation, now blocked, was restoring the original effects and outcomes of those laws and regulations, and probably as originally intended by those whom passed it.
All I can say is that I'm now quite certain I wasn't misreading the narrow part of the intent of your words that I initially commented on.