Yes. Courts do that a lot in case you've not noticed

(EDIT: Though not in this case! From the opinion: "This case is about the assertion of power by one unelected official, Andrea Palm, ..."[0].)

But in this case the issue is that a governor cannot impose law without the legislature. Wisconsin's legislature still sits -- if not in session, perhaps the governor could call it into session -- and can pass legislation.

[0] https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?cont...

This line of thinking is very close to Bonapartism as interpreted by Napoleon III. I am the democratically elected emperor; my mandate comes from the people having elected me; I may do whatever I deem in the interest of the people who have elected me.

Yes, in a dispute filed by the democratically elected members of the legislature? With the end result being that a democratically elected legislature with more than one person will have the opportunity to talk about the tradeoffs involved, make the case for constituents, and decide things like whether the response must be uniform between the dense cities and the rural countryside.

This is a strict increase in democracy.

Democratically elected to enforce the laws, not make them, except in truly limited circumstances.

The order they struck down was an order issued by a non-elected bureaucrat.

Which is, of course, under the delegated authority of the governor.