While he may be a man of his word, it's hardly a proper way to interpret a matter of constitutional law. Head count and I'll vote.
This vote merely means that the case will be reviewed. It's not a ruling on the constitutionality of the law.
It's not a matter of interpreting the law. It a mater of saying that with someone's life on the line, if 4 of the justices believe that there is something that needs looked into, he feels that's convincing enough that it should be looked into.