We are at a point where we can't keep pointing the figure and saying "but what about them."
Or we could go after the biggest offenders first. Even a modest 10% reduction in AG water usage would result in saving many times the amount of water that Nestle uses. The technology to do so isn't expensive, as they've been developed for water strapped regions like California, there is just little reason to do so when for a small fee you can get all the water you could want.
But instead they attempted to target Nestle's permit, which likely would've been overturned in court as there would be little legal basis to deny it. To me it looked more like astroturf by the AG industry to distract people of the collapsing aquifers after decades of abuse.