as in should it be done, no.

IMO, protesting at someone's home is making it a personal confrontation against them as opposed to a confrontation with the ideas, policy, position etc. Might equate protesting outside someone's home to an ad hominem argument rather than addressing someone's position. By making it personal, you are saying / assuming bad / evil personal motives rather than assuming good individual motives with a disagreement on the position / policy / argument and addressing the substance of their position.

Its both lazy and destructive long term. It is what almost all of our politics is today, but doesn't mean its appropriate at all.

In this specific case, assume the Justices high level motives are good- that they honestly believe they are upholding their role and faithfully interpreting the Constitution. Or, if you can't get to that point, step back further, assume that they believe they making the best decision for society as a whole or even just that they believe they are doing what is morally right. Then oppose the position, argument, policy from that perspective - reason, use examples and statistics, appeal to their morals to oppose the position - screaming at them in their home that they are evil isn't beneficial to getting to the best result for any of us long term.