1. May a state court resolve a federal constitutional claim by treating an AEDPA habeas decision of this Court as a ruling on the merits when this Court explicitly refrained from deciding the underlying constitutional question?

2. Does a state parole process in which officials are not required to factor maturity, rehabilitation, and the mitigating effects of youth into the decision whether to release a juvenile offender serving life in prison comply with the Eighth Amendment as interpreted in Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010)?

Whether a state court may resolve a federal constitutional claim by treating an AEDPA habeas decision of the Supreme Court as a ruling on the merits when the Court explicitly refrained from deciding the underlying constitutional question