ALERT: Supreme Court Issues Shock Ruling

ALERT: Supreme Court Issues Shock Ruling

One of the major reasons many people gave for voting for Donald Trump was the Supreme Court. With Hillary Clinton in office and several potential judicial appointments to be made, Americans were rightly concerned about even more liberal justices being put in the Supreme Court. Trump’s first appointment — Neil Gorsuch — seemed to make conservatives happy. But a new ruling may have them rethinking their support.

In 2013, the North Carolina state legislature — then controlled by Republicans — introduced a measure requiring voters to present IDs at the polls, while also shortening the early-voting period and ending same-day registration altogether. Last April, a district court judge struck down a challenge to the North Carolina law… a judge appointed by President George W. Bush. But just three months later, a three-judge panel in a circuit court of appeals reversed that decision, saying that the law intended to discriminate based on race. Unsurprisingly, those were all Democrat appointees.

So, what did the Supreme Court decide to do?

Trending: The 15 Best Conservative News Sites On The Internet

Chief Justice John Roberts issued a statement on Monday announcing that the ruling would be left in place. The panel’s ruling that the voter ID law was unconstitutional because lawmakers intentionally were trying to suppress the votes of black Americans will therefore remain. While Roberts said that it should not be taken “as an indication of the justices’ views on the broader issues at stake.”

“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 in the statement.

No justice stepped in to offer a dissent on the court’s decision not to take the case… including Neil Gorsuch. Is this a sign of what should be expected from Gorsuch in future rulings? If so, then it’s not promising.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!