Uber told Engadget it was "disappointed" with the outcome, claiming that it "punishes" drivers who are obligated to rent cars. In the past, it has argued that the caps would hurt outer boroughs (with less access to mass transit) and wouldn't fix NYC's problems with traffic congestion.

It's not shocking that the Supreme Court would toss the attempt to axe the law when challenges like this typically don't work. It does ensure that the extended cap will continue as planned, though. It also doesn't bode well for Lyft's lawsuit against NYC with similar objections. Like it or not, both ridesharing companies may have to live with the limits for the foreseeable future.