I’m sure I’m less versed in the intricacies than Ed Whelan, but at first glance it looks as though the Court handed pro-lifers a win on one of the two major issues in dispute in the case, without settling the second issue. Those issues were, first, whether a parental-consent law has to include a health exception and, second, whether the law should be enjoined because it could be applied in unconstitutional ways or should instead be blocked only from being applied in such ways. The Court seems to have handed pro-lifers a win on that second issue.