The Supreme Court’s majority appointed by Republicans granted the Trump administration’s emergency request Friday to use a citizenship database ahead of the midterm elections. But the majority also identified a federal restriction that limits what states may do with voter registrations as November approaches.

That restriction comes from the National Voter Registration Act, or NVRA. The law bars states from systematically purging voters during the 90 days before federal elections, leaving states limited in how broadly they can conduct voter roll maintenance during that period.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson focused on that limitation in a dissent written for the court’s three Democratic appointees. Jackson called the “bright side” of the ruling its “minimal short-term impact,” because states can conduct only individualized voter roll maintenance ahead of November.

Yet the majority also used a footnote in Friday’s ruling to point toward a much broader dispute waiting on the court’s calendar. That coming case could determine the scope of the NVRA restriction and shape how states attempt to cancel registrations close to federal elections.

The case is Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota, which the justices are scheduled to hear during the coming term. One of its central issues is whether federal law bars states from implementing programs within 90 days of federal elections to cancel the voting registrations of noncitizens.

The majority emphasized that the question was not properly before the court in Friday’s database dispute, Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters. The parties had neither requested a decision on the matter nor submitted briefing asking the justices to resolve it.

“The parties in this case do not ask us to address that question and have not briefed it, and we do not need to decide it here,” the court said in its footnote. The majority therefore left the broader legal question unanswered for now.

That distinction means the immediate database ruling and the coming NVRA appeal remain separate, even though Friday’s decision placed them side by side. Whatever effect the database ruling has on the midterms, the larger fight over voter registration cancellations is not disappearing.

Oral argument in Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota is scheduled for December. A decision is expected by July, giving the justices another opportunity to rule on voting registration restrictions after the immediate midterm election period has passed.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal over opposition from Democrats and voting rights groups. The appeal is backed by Republicans, while the Trump administration is supporting the GOP’s position before the high court.

Four of the Supreme Court’s nine justices are required to grant a petition for review. The vote tally on whether to hear the case is not public, so the breakdown among the justices who supported taking the appeal remains undisclosed.

The justices are set to return to the bench on Oct. 5 for the beginning of the new term. When they consider the RNC appeal, the 90 day restriction will be only one of two issues placed before them.

The second issue concerns Arizona and proof of citizenship for voter registration. The justices will consider whether the NVRA or a federal consent decree prevents Arizona from requiring people who use a state registration form to prove their citizenship.

The Republican National Committee is challenging a federal appeals court ruling that raised concerns about the restrictions Republicans want. That court warned that the desired restrictions would result in voter suppression, putting the consequences for eligible voters squarely within the dispute.

Friday’s ruling may have limited immediate effects because of the NVRA’s 90 day rule, as Jackson observed. But the majority’s footnote made clear that the court is preparing to confront the scope of that very protection in the appeal scheduled for argument in December.