Wrong again, and that’s not my “claim” its the LAW.
“The denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case.” United States v. Carver, 260 U.S. 482, 490 (1923) (Holmes, J.). Accord, Hughes Tool Co. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 409 U.S. 363, 366, n. 1 (1973); Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 489-497 (1953).
The “variety of considerations [that] underlie denials of the writ,” Maryland v. Baltimore Radio Show, 338 U.S. 912, 917 (1950) (opinion of Frankfurter, J.), counsels against according denials of certiorari any precedential value. Concomitantly, opinions accompanying the denial of certiorari cannot have the same effect as decisions on the merits.” Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 296 (1989).
You might not like it, but it is the law.
It’s not a decision of any kind. It’s not precedent. It says nothing about the merits.
Also of consideration is that due to the “Cert Pool” it’s far more likely that whichever clerk wrote the pool memo on this case actually influenced Roberts and Kavanaugh.
Gorsuch and Alito do not participate in the “Cert Pool” all of the other justices do.