Given circuit precedent on stare decisis, a GVR citing a specific Supreme Court decision in which no opinion commands the support of a majority of the Court, the analysis of the cited plurality holding looks to the narrowest ground justifying the order. The controlling rule is either derived from the common ground shared by the rationale of the plurality and the concurrence(s) in the judgment or from a logical subset of non-contradictory reasons that the rationales can accommodate. The entirety of a single concurrence in the judgment does not control.
The concurrence cited here accords a previous decision stare decisis effect and disagrees with the plurality's distinguishing of the facts, so the narrowest ground is constituted by the balancing test within the prior holding.
Dissent: GVR with a named case implies a common ground in the holding. Concurrence explicitly warned about imposing a balancing test in the substantial obstacle determination. Controlling test is the substantial obstacle test from Casey.