My guess is that this ruling is in keeping with the Dobbs decision, in that it is a state’s issue as it deals with all forms of abortion, not the Federal Government. Which is why they heard the case, to make it their official stance as a reinforcement on the issue of abortion in whatever form is presented. From now on the standing ruling sets the precedence for all forms of abortion, and any cases brought forth will rule standing as the reason for rejecting hearing future cases on the abortion issue.
In other court news, in Mock v. Garland (N.D. TX), Texas federal judge vacates ATF pistol brace rule, preventing its enforcement across the country.
I haven’t read the decision , but it’s clear it was less or nothing about states rights or abortion, but standing of those bringing the case. Otherwise I would have thought they would have made a states rights ruling or Thomas and/or Alitio would have chimed in.