I'm not 100% sure that this will be relevant, but it's worth noting that the U.S. Senate has a rule about quorum, and specifically is noted on the senate government website states the following (Bold for emphasis by myself):
Article I, section 5 of the Constitution requires that a quorum (51 senators) be present for the Senate to conduct business. Often, fewer than 51 senators are present on the floor, but the Senate presumes a quorum unless a roll call vote or quorum call suggests otherwise.presumes a quorum unless a roll call vote or quorum call suggests otherwise.
In particular, the issue with a lack of a quorum isn't always necessarily that big of a deal that nuking it is considered extreme.
Given the public departure of the Democrats from the legislature, it could be that they are unable to act as if they do have quorum ignoring that they don't, or that at least one Democrat is in the legislature suggesting that there is a lack of quorum.
It could be similar to a filibuster to an effect - to break a filibuster, you need the two-thirds majority to vote to end a filibuster...and if you don't have that, you're at the mercy of the person insisting that they still have the right to debate the law that is being filibustered.