Not only do I think you're right, I think it's similar to the reason the UK Government kept harping on about not making end-to-end encryption illegal.
They weren't making it illegal - they were planning on making end-to-end encryption impractical instead. (i.e. the first time any of the authorities asked for a decrypted version of a message and they couldn't provide it, they'd be prosecuted. Which isn't the same thing as making it illegal)