My last entry on the BC polygamy case said more "what I expected to happen" than "what I thought should happen", so here's a chance to correct that. The proper answer to "some people are abusing a legal mechanism" - because, to the courts and the state, that's all marriage is or should be - is to address the specific abuses with safeguards, not to ban the use of the mechanism by everybody that's even remotely like those that are abusing it.
I said this last time, but I'll repeat myself: Bountiful and its analogues in Utah and Texas and so on are not a consequence of polygamy per se any more than spousal abuse is a consequence of two-person marriage, or straight marriage. The law is hitting the wrong target and addressing the wrong harm. Whichever courts hear this case can dodge this quite easily, but that doesn't mean that they should, however anyone feels about Blackmore as a person.