First of all thank you for trying to provide an alternative solution here, I appreciate your feedback. Although it's possible to re-write the code differently it does not solve the control flow issue of the demonstrated nested switches. I want to jump to the next case of the parent switch and execute the code there to avoid duplicating the same code. Labeled statements are already allowed for most keywords, however fallthrough was left out, even if the control in the second example from above feels natural.
IMO, I don't think we should be doing anything to encourage nesting switches. Most of the times I've seen people using them, they would be better off refactoring their logic to be more readable and maintainable.
Struggling with this now. There's few better alternatives for designing functions that return pre-defined outputs than enums and switch statements; being able to fallthrough labeled switches would be a life saver. None of the solutions mentioned here address complex situations sufficiently.