This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – Scott, AndyT, Kris, J. Taylor, David
Text in the original quoted material had certain words emphasized (underlined, italicized, or in bold) but, for whatever reason, the author chose to put the text in roman—removing the emphasis. The notation indicates that the original material has been altered in this way.
This is the opposite of what is normally done.
The Chicago Manual of Style (13.62):
An author wishing to call particular attention to a word or phrase in quoted material may italicize it but must tell readers what has been done, by means of such formulas as “italics mine,” “italics added,” “emphasis added,” or “emphasis mine.” Occasionally it may be important to point out that italics in a quotation were indeed in the original. Here the usual phrase is “italics in the original” or, for example, “De Quincey’s italics.” This information appears either in parentheses following the quotation or in a source note to the quotation. If there are italics in the original of the passage quoted, the information is best enclosed in brackets and placed directly after the added italics. Consistency in method throughout a work is essential.
Author's or reviewer's note (enclosed usually in square brackets) after a quote to indicate that he or she has emphasized certain words by bolding, italicizing, or underlining them. Sometimes the term 'emphasis mine' is used instead.
Interestingly, I cannot easily locate a style guide that mentions the particular use of removing emphasis from quoted material. Nonetheless, the notation follows the general convention for such alteration.
I was able to locate a note from a professor at UCLA, in which he instructs students on how to use this notation:
All quotations must be exact, except that you may interpolate words enclosed in square brackets ("[ ]"), excise words by replacing them with ellipsis ("..."), and underline or italicize for emphasis by adding in square brackets “emphasis supplied” or delete the author’s underlining or italicization by adding in square brackets “emphasis deleted.”
Note: This has nothing to do with Ibid. That word is used in citations. Per Chicago:
The abbreviation ibid. (from ibidem, “in the same place”) usually refers to a single work cited in the note immediately preceding.
So, Ibid. essentially means "the source of this material is the same as previously referenced." The use of Ibid. has fallen out of favour recently, with the preference now being to simply repeat the last name of the author. For example, in the picture you provided, it would be replaced with "Grisez"—and that would refer to "Grisez, CMP," not "Grisez and Shaw."