It seems significant but how can I tell whether it is significant?

Hmmm. From 'True the Vote' Wins Big Case After Decade-Long Battle with IRS by Andrea Morris.

The Obama administration was accused of using the IRS to go after political opponents. The principle case was that of Lois Lerner targeting conservative groups and denying them tax exempt status which they otherwise would have been due, thus materially reducing their effectiveness.

Despite denials in the press, by the press, it appears that the issue was real. Whether it was directed by the administration or whether it was simply a lone-wolf Deep State initiative was never resolved. This was one of those many instances where the mainstream media seemed to be covering for the administration, not so much by lying for them but by simply ignoring the story as much as possible.

Fox profiled story for a year or two but without other mainstream coverage it peetered out.

My rough assessment was that it was a real violation of the law, that Lerner should have been fired and penalized for pursuing a partisan treatment of citizens, and that it was unlikely the Obama administration had initiated the IRS scrutiny or had facilitated it. My suspicion was that it was simply a collaboration of like-minded mid-level apparatchiks on a wink-wink, nudge-nudge basis.

One of the plaintiffs was an outfit, True The Vote, out of Texas I recall. Their mission was to ensure election integrity by ensuring that only citizens vote in elections, reviewing electoral roles to ensure that they included only valid voters, and the like.

The 'True the Vote' v. IRS lawsuit has finally come to an end. And it's being seen as a big victory for freedom in the IRS-Lois Lerner saga in which conservative organizations were targeted and blocked from gaining tax-exempt status to keep them from being involved in the 2012 election.

This remarkable new ruling by US District Court Judge Reggie Walton was in favor of True the Vote, penalizing the IRS with extensive attorneys fees.

The ruling indicates that, throughout the case, the IRS displayed unconstitutional discrimination and unethical behavior against True the Vote, a group that fights for election integrity.

The judge's decision marks the end of a nearly decade long battle that first began in 2010.

True the Vote and its founder Catherine Engelbrecht, were targeted by top federal government agencies including the IRS, DOJ, FBI, ATF, OSHA.Under the Obama Administration, those agencies launched 23 audits, investigations, and inquiries, persistently attacking the group.

In 2013, True the Vote sued the IRS, seeking to prove that the IRS actions were unconstitutional. The court fees added up into the millions and virtually devastated the only conservative voters' rights organization in America.

Engelbrecht said, "At the outset of this case, I testified before Congress and swore that I would never retreat or surrender. Today I have fulfilled that oath. Thank you to all the citizens across the country who stood steadfastly beside us. We could not have done it without your support."

Judge Walton confirmed the IRS's wrongdoing, saying that discrimination on the basis of name, association, or political viewpoint violates our First Amendment rights.

The reprimand continued as Judge Walton also ruled that True the Vote receive a "bad faith enhancement" to its requested attorney's fees.

The case's conclusion and judge's opinion are "clear and convincing evidence necessary for a finding of bad faith" in their discrimination against True the Vote.

True the Vote requested a recovery amount of $1.9 million in attorneys' fees. The total award amount is still pending.

This news came out on Friday. Here it is Monday morning and googling I cannot find anyone else reporting on it other than Breitbart.

I do not know CBN as a news source but would imagine that they are philosophically sympathetic to True the Vote. I would like to see someone else's more independent assessment of its meaning.

Is this just a weigh-station decision likely to be overturned? Is this more a procedural anomaly and without interpretative merit? I'd like to see some sort of confirmation.

If the report is accurate, then that is pretty significant since it is tied to the larger issue of partisan use of the IRS for political ends. That is Nixon territory. Did the judge really just conclude that the IRS and allied agencies did indeed function as extensions of the Obama White House or the DNC as is implied?

I guess I'll just have to wait and see what happens over the next week. For now though, this seems momentous and the lack of coverage much like the dog that didn't bark in the night.

It also recalls Iowa Hawk's evergreen tweet from years ago.

Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving.

— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) May 9, 2013