By comparison, the fetal remains provision is “quite mild,” Liptak said.

What does this ruling change?

Neither part of the law had been enforced before, as they both were blocked by lower courts before they became effective, Liptak said. But with the Supreme Court’s decision, the fetal remains provision will most likely be enforced in a matter of weeks.

What does it mean for Roe v. Wade?

By sidestepping the fetal characteristics provision of the two-part law, the justices punted what could have been a test of the future of Roe v. Wade.

The justices are taking “incremental steps,” said Liptak, who covered the ruling.

“They tiptoed into this area by reinstating the fetal remains law, which is sort of abortion related, but they’re not moving fast,” he said. “They’re taking their time in teeing up a major abortion case.”

The case was also the first test of such an issue since Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh succeeded Justice Anthony M. Kennedy last year. Justice Kennedy had been a cautious supporter of abortion rights, according to Liptak, while Justice Kavanaugh’s limited record on the subject suggested some skepticism.

The ruling keeps abortion off the Supreme Court’s docket for now, and the compromise indicates that the court may be biding its time to tackle a major abortion case, even as multiple bills aiming to restrict abortion access have made their way through statehouses.

What’s the debate about fetal remains?

The part of the law about how to dispose of fetal remains was struck down by lower courts on the grounds that it wasn’t rational — women were allowed to dispose of the fetus as they wished, while abortion providers had to cremate or bury. The decision had nothing to do with whether or not a fetus was considered a person, Liptak said.

In urging the justices to reinstate that part of the law, which they did, lawyers argued that fetal remains were worthy of respectful treatment.