Happy to be corrected by others who know more about this hypertechnical legal doctrine, but my take is the dissenters are right about Rooker-Feldman being a questionable-to-bad rule, but the issue presented in this case (about trial court vs. high court judgments) is a weird place to draw the line.
If you're one of the 50 people interested in this case, I encourage you to read Thomas's defense of Rooker–Feldman in concurrence and Barrett's attack on it in dissent. I'm honestly not sure who's right, but it's an interesting debate. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...