No, it didn't. It also didn't rule in favor of Oracle that the Java was protected by the copyright on Java. It just ruled that Google's use of the parts of the API in reimplementing it would be Fair Use even if it was protected, and therefore there was no need to answer the question of whether it was protected.

(This may seem backwards because it is skipping over a more basic question to a question that should only matter after that has been answered, but the Supreme Court can answer questions in any order it chooses, and will often answer the question that is easiest [and least disruptive/impactful] to answer first even when it seems logically backwards, if that lets it not answer other questions.)