What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to determine the bases on which the Supreme Court rested its decision with regard to the legal provision that the Court considered in the case. Consider "judicial review (national level)" if the majority determined the constitutionality of some action taken by some unit or official of the federal government, including an interstate compact. Consider "judicial review (state level)" if the majority determined the constitutionality of some action taken by some unit or official of a state or local government. Consider "statutory construction" for cases where the majority interpret a federal statute, treaty, or court rule; if the Court interprets a federal statute governing the powers or jurisdiction of a federal court; if the Court construes a state law as incompatible with a federal law; or if an administrative official interprets a federal statute. Do not consider "statutory construction" where an administrative agency or official acts "pursuant to" a statute, unless the Court interprets the statute to determine if administrative action is proper. Consider "interpretation of administrative regulation or rule, or executive order" if the majority treats federal administrative action in arriving at its decision.Consider "diversity jurisdiction" if the majority said in approximately so many words that under its diversity jurisdiction it is interpreting state law. Consider "federal common law" if the majority indicate that it used a judge-made "doctrine" or "rule; if the Court without more merely specifies the disposition the Court has made of the case and cites one or more of its own previously decided cases unless the citation is qualified by the word "see."; if the case concerns admiralty or maritime law, or some other aspect of the law of nations other than a treaty; if the case concerns the retroactive application of a constitutional provision or a previous decision of the Court; if the case concerns an exclusionary rule, the harmless error rule (though not the statute), the abstention doctrine, comity, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or if the case concerns a "rule" or "doctrine" that is not specified as related to or connected with a constitutional or statutory provision. Consider "Supreme Court supervision of lower federal or state courts or original jurisdiction" otherwise (i.e., the residual code); for issues pertaining to non-statutorily based Judicial Power topics; for cases arising under the Court's original jurisdiction; in cases in which the Court denied or dismissed the petition for review or where the decision of a lower court is affirmed by a tie vote; or in workers' compensation litigation involving statutory interpretation and, in addition, a discussion of jury determination and/or the sufficiency of the evidence.

Opinion:
YOUNGER, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, et al. v. GILMORE et al.
No. 70-9.
Argued October 14, 1971
Decided November 8, 1971
George R. Nock, Deputy Attorney General of California, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs were Evelle J. Younger, Attorney General, pro se, Albert W. Harris, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Robert R. Granucd, Deputy Attorney General.
John Eshleman Wahl, by appointment of the Court, post, p'. 814, argued the cause for appellees. With him on the brief was Marshall W. Krause.
Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, Charles Stephen Ralston, Stanley A. Bass, Anthony G. Amsterdam, William Bennett Turner, and Alice Daniel filed a brief for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance.
Per Curiam.
On this appeal we postponed the question of jurisdiction pending the hearing of the case on the merits. 401 U. S. 906 (1971).
Having heard the case on its merits, we find that this Court does have jurisdiction (Alabama Teachers v. Alabama Public School and College Authority, 393 U. S. 400 (1969)) and affirm the judgment of the District Court for the Northern District of California. Johnson v. Avery, 393 U. S. 483 (1969).

Question: What is the basis of the Supreme Court's decision?

Choices:
judicial review (national level)
judicial review (state level)
Supreme Court supervision of lower federal or state courts or original jurisdiction
statutory construction
interpretation of administrative regulation or rule, or executive order
diversity jurisdiction
federal common law

Answer: 3