"I understand the Supreme Court to have intended its decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), to be a decision of super-stare decisis with respect to a woman's fundamental right to choose whether or not to proceed with a pregnancy."
This is not his understanding (as implied in the original article) but the Supreme Court's decision which he believes he has no chance of changing by agreeing with the defendants.
I guess it depends on whether you think judges decide fundamental rights or whether fundamental rights exist apart from judges decisions. It seems to me that the end part of his decision suggests he believes the latter in which case his claim that there is a fundamental right to abortion is highly problematical.