JUST IN: Supreme Court Issues Shocking Ruling – You’ll Be Livid


As we’re all well aware, one of the key powers of the president is the appointment of Supreme Court justices. The appointment of Neil Gorsuch was crucially important to help bolster the conservative viewpoints of the Court and slow the activist shift that seemed to be taking place after Barack Obama’s appointments.

Or did it?

The Republican-controlled legislature in North Carolina passed a measure in 2013 requiring voters present IDs at the polls, shortening the early-voting period and ending same-day registration.

In April of last year, a district court judge appointed by President George W. Bush struck down a challenge to the law. However, months later in July, a three-judge panel of Democrat appointees in a circuit court of appeals reversed the decision, saying the law was passed with the INTENT of discriminating based on race.

Well, perhaps the Court agrees?

Today, per Politico, Chief Justice John Roberts issued an unusual statement Monday saying the high court’s decision not to wade into the case should not be taken as an indication of the justices’ views on the broader issues at stake. He suggested the high court’s decision not to wade into the case was because of the confusion over the newly-elected Democratic governor and attorney general’s efforts to have the state back out of the litigation and accept the 4th Circuit’s decision last year voiding the controversial measure.

“Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this Court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that ‘[t]he denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case,’” Roberts wrote.

No justice publicly dissented from the court’s decision not to take the case or indicated whether he or she agreed with Roberts’ explanation of why the court was punting on this issue.

Hmm. No justice publicly dissented…which would include Neil Gorsuch.

Is this just a technicality? Is it a sign the Supreme Court doesn’t want to get its collective hands dirty? Or is it something else? Time will tell.

But we know for certain how the Democrats will spin it.