Apologies for Eire/Ireland!
The constitutional issue, as I understand it, would be in relation to the woman's human rights, i.e. that she had a medical treatment imposed upon her by the state against her will.
A couple of thoughts arise. First, the court ruling as I understand it was to protect the child's interests because at the time it was made it was considered that it would have been an orphan with no support network whatsoever should the mother die.
Second, as I understand it under Irish law, the child became an Irish citizen (or at least entitled to citizenship) at birth, so the state had an obligation to protect the child.
Third, if the law in Ireland is the same as in E&W, one can sue to obtain reparation/compensation for a wrong already done, or to force somebody to do something (madamus) or cease doing something (ceriatori). I can see how the woman might sue for an arbitrary figure for damages for assault, etc. Is there a possibility that the state may appoint someone to act on behalf of the child?
In E&W there is a procedure - rarely used - where the Attorney-General will take a case to the High Court/House of Lords where the issue is so important that a definitive ruling is required. Presumably the same could apply here.
I entirely accept your point about the constitutional issues. I can't help feeling, however, that the more 'sensational' media would make a hell of a meal of this in the 'Crazy Cult Woman Wanted To Die' type mode (let alone issues re being an immigrant) and that any savvy PR guy for WTBTS would be weighing this up (divine light/guidance notwithstanding).
But I speak as an outsider (not now, never have been, a JW etc.) and not as an Irish citizen or resident (although a fellow Celt), and I bow to your knowledge of the feelings re the issues involved.
Regards