We dont know how often Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has withheld a vote to grant cert in the 13 years he has held the job, leaving his three generally more conservative colleagues without the necessary fourth vote, because the chief justice worried about either his own or Justice Anthony M. Kennedys vote going the wrong way when it came to the merits. How often did discretion rule when the chiefs vote was cast not to hear a case
So as we have known they are not neutral.
So they tend to rule on what they think is best for them and not what the constitution says.
Exactly right. They do not know what the hell their job is. Is it covered in the text of the Constitution or not. End of case. They are and always be the super legislative branch and the people of the US (most anyway) do not care.
Not exactly. What the author is saying is that when reviewing which cases to take, there have currently been 3 votes on one side and 3 on the other. Whomever casts the 4th vote means they want to review the case and clarify the law, but they are afraid to be the 4th vote when they know they are not likely win 5 votes after the review.
The implication is, of course, that with 5 or 6 votes more certain to be decided in the way the 4th vote goes the court will begin hearing a lot more important cases - hopefully that would mean more Constitutionally justified, freedom inspired rulings from the court. Instead, many of these cases are not heard for fear that the 4th vote will be overruled by the other 5.