SOUTER IN ROBERTS CLOTHING, ANN COULTER

What I think is happening, to be more precise, is that they're deferring rulings where O'Connor would be the fifth vote.

Although Brown v. Sanders is an exception to that.

It's kind of interesting to go back and see how wrong Ann was on this issue.
However, I can't help but think that her objections to both Roberts but especially Meirs were couched in such inflammatory and vicious terms that, at the time, they amounted to a stab in the back to Bush.
I've never held her in the same regard since and, while perhaps it's just my imagination, I think many others share my disillusionment with her loss of judgment on this matter.
There is a difference between expressing your disagreement with a particular decision, but what she did was publicly kick Bush in the crotch. I think she owed him a little more loyalty, especially considering what he has been through these past five years.

I totally agree with your assessment of Ann Coulter. She is a flame-thrower, but she throws the flames in the wrong direction: at the Right instead of the Left.

I share your disillusionment with her loss of judgment on this matter.

OK, here's the second alignment summary with affinity percentages for Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas. There are now 24 signed rulings of the Supreme Court.

************************

Central Va. Community College v. Katz

STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which O’CONNOR, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA and KENNEDY, JJ., joined.

Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc.

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and O’CONNOR, SCALIA, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KENNEDY, J., joined.

Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna

SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, KENNEDY, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Domino's Pizza, Inc. v. McDonald

SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Dolan v. Postal Service

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, SCALIA, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.

GINSBURG, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Oregon v. Guzek

BREYER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, KENNEDY, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which THOMAS, J., joined. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

************************

So! After 24 signed rulings, 22 of which count for our purposes (remember two were previously excluded due to recusals), the deviations are as follows.

In Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, Roberts joined the majority ruling by Scalia while Thomas filed a dissenting opinion.

In Dolan v. Postal Service, Roberts joined the majority ruling by Kennedy while Thomas filed a dissenting opinion.

In Oregon v. Guzek, Roberts joined the majority ruling by Kennedy while Scalia filed an opinion concurring in judgment that was joined by Thomas.

So, drumroll please!

Roberts/Scalia: 95.45%
Roberts/Thomas: 81.82%

After 22 rulings.

And, just for the sake of curiosity:

Roberts/Kennedy: 86.36%
Roberts/Souter: 86.36%

And, for the record, encompassing all 17 signed rulings in which both Roberts and O'Connor participated:

Roberts/O'Connor: 88.24%

Next installment to post soon after 30 signed rulings!

Interesting that O'Conner in these cases agreed with Scalia more than Thomas agrees with Scalia.

Thank you for the analysis. Very interesting.

Since it is the title of this thread, perhaps you should include the Souter/Roberts percentage.

Not quite. In the 16 cases where all three participated, Thomas & Scalia disagreed once whereas O'Connor and Scalia disagreed twice. Thomas' lone dissents came after O'Connor left the Court.

I did! 86.36%.

Sure thing! It'll become more meaningful as a lot more controversial rulings come down the pike. There's been an unusual degree of unanimity thus far (compared to recent years). I'll keep posting roughly every ten rulings until the end of the session (probably between 60-70 signed rulings altogether). Would you like me to ping you along as well?

Would you like me to ping you along as well?

That would be great. Thank you!

I sure hope Ann is wrong. If Bush picked another Souter, he will go down as a big spender, who was great in the war, but certainly not a conservative

OK, it's time for the third installment in our tracking of agreement between Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas. There are now 35 signed rulings of the Supreme Court.

************************

Texaco Inc. v. Dagher

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the cases.

Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc.

BREYER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the cases.

Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc.

STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc.

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit

STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except ALITO, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

United States v. Grubbs

SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, and BREYER, JJ., joined, and in which STEVENS, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, J., joined as to Parts I and II. SOUTER, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which STEVENS and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Georgia v. Randolph

SOUTER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEVENS, KENNEDY, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., and BREYER, J., filed concurring opinions. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined. SCALIA, J., and THOMAS, J., filed dissenting opinions. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Northern Ins. Co. of N. Y. v. Chatham County

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Day v. McDonough

GINSBURG, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, SOUTER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed an opinion dissenting from the judgment, in which BREYER, J., joined. SCALIA, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS and BREYER, JJ., joined.

Jones v. Flowers

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA and KENNEDY, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Hartman v. Moore

SOUTER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEVENS, SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BREYER, J., joined. ROBERTS, C. J., and ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

************************

So! After 35 signed rulings, 32 count for our purposes; two were previously excluded due to recusals and, of the above, Hartman v. Moore is also excluded due to a Roberts recusal. Besides that, the deviations are as follows:

In Georgia v. Randolph, Roberts filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Scalia. Thomas filed a separate dissenting opinion that no one joined.

In Day v. McDonough, Roberts joined the majority ruling by Ginsburg (!) while Scalia filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Thomas.

In Jones v. Flowers, Roberts issued the majority ruling while Thomas filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Scalia.

So, drumroll please!

Roberts/Scalia: 90.625% (agree in 29 of 32)
Roberts/Thomas: 78.125% (agree in 25 of 32)

After 35 signed rulings in 32 of which all three participated.

And, once again, just for the sake of curiosity:

Roberts/Kennedy: 84.375%
Roberts/Souter: 84.375%

Next installment to post soon after 40 applicable signed rulings!

With the close of an remarkable streak of near unanimity, it's time for the fourth installment tracking agreement between Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas. There are now 44 signed rulings of the Supreme Court.

************************

Arkansas Dept. of Health and Human Servs. v. Ahlborn

STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Marshall v. Marshall

GINSBURG, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

Holmes v. South Carolina

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEVENS, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. GINSBURG, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc.

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

S. D. Warren Co. v. Maine Bd. of Environmental Protection

SOUTER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, KENNEDY, THOMAS, GINSBURG, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined, and in which SCALIA, J., joined as to all but Part III–C.

eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L. L. C.

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a concurring opinion, in which SCALIA and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, and BREYER, JJ., joined.

Brigham City v. Stuart

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. STEVENS, J., filed a concurring opinion.

Garcetti v. Ceballos

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. SOUTER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

************************

So! After 44 signed rulings, 41 count for our purposes, with three having been excluded due to recusals.

Of the above 9 rulings Roberts and Thomas were in agreement 100% of the time.

In S. D. Warren Co. v. Maine Bd. of Environmental Protection, Roberts and Thomas joined the majority ruling by Souter while Scalia joined as to all but Part III-C. (so close - d'oh!)

So, drumroll please!

Roberts/Scalia: 90.244% (agree in 37 of 41)
Roberts/Thomas: 82.927% (agree in 34 of 41)

After 44 signed rulings in 41 of which all three participated.

And, yet again, for the sake of curiosity:

Roberts/Kennedy: 87.805%
Roberts/Souter: 85.366%

Next installment to post soon after 50 applicable signed rulings!

Yep, it's that time of month again. Time for the fifth installment tracking agreement between Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas. There are now 55 signed rulings of the Supreme Court. We're almost there!

************************

Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, SCALIA, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and ALITO, JJ., joined, and in which THOMAS, J., joined as to Part III. SCALIA, J., filed a concurring opinion. THOMAS, J., and BREYER, J., filed opinions concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Zedner v. United States

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined, and in which SCALIA, J., joined as to all but Part III–A–2. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

House v. Bell

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. ROBERTS, C. J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, inwhich SCALIA and THOMAS, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Hill v. McDonough

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

Hudson v. Michigan

SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, and III, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Part IV, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS and ALITO, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinionconcurring in part and concurring in the judgment. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined.

Kircher v. Putnam Funds Trust

SOUTER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, KENNEDY, THOMAS, GINSBURG, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined, and in which SCALIA, J., joined as to Parts I, III, and IV. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

Howard Delivery Service, Inc. v. Zurich American Ins. Co.

GINSBURG, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, SCALIA, THOMAS, and BREYER, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER and ALITO, JJ., joined.

Empire HealthChoice Assurance, Inc. v. McVeigh

GINSBURG, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, SCALIA, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KENNEDY, SOUTER, and ALITO, JJ., joined.

Rapanos v. United States

SCALIA, J., announced the judgment of the Court, and delivered anopinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS and ALITO, JJ., joined. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a concurring opinion. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Davis v. Washington

SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, KENNEDY, SOUTER, GINSBURG, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

Samson v. California

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, GINSBURG, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER and BREYER, JJ., joined.

************************

So again! After 55 signed rulings, 52 count for our purposes, with three having been excluded due to recusals. Technically, we could also count the per curiam ruling in Youngblood v. West Virginia, as Scalia filed a dissent that was joined by Thomas (and Kennedy filed his own separate dissent). For consistency that one's excluded, but if it were factored in then it'd be one more case where Roberts differed from both Scalia and Thomas, as the Chief Justice joined the per curiam.

Now, by contrast to last installment's unanimity, the above 11 rulings were a mess! These were the discrepancies between Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas:

In Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp., Roberts and Scalia joined the majority ruling by Kennedy with Thomas concurring in part and dissenting in part.

In Zedner v. United States, Roberts and Thomas joined the majority ruling by Alito while Scalia filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

In Kircher v. Putnam Funds Trust, Roberts and Thomas joined the majority ruling by Souter while Scalia filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

In Davis v. Washington, Roberts joined the majority ruling by Scalia while Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

OK, drumroll please!

Roberts/Scalia: 88.462% (agree in 46 of 52)
Roberts/Thomas: 82.692% (agree in 43 of 52)

After 55 signed rulings in 52 of which all three participated.

And, once again, for the sake of curiosity:

Roberts/Kennedy: 80.769% (agree in 42 of 52)
Roberts/Souter: 76.923% (agree in 40 of 52)

And, while we're at it, Alito and Roberts parted ways in two rulings above, so for the 21 cases where both have participated, the agreement is:

Roberts/Alito: 90.476% (agree in 19 of 21)

Next installment to post soon after 50 applicable signed rulings!

PS. When factoring in the new per curiam rulings and the consolidated cases, the maximum possible number of signed rulings for the term that would apply to our purposes is now 68. Therefore, with 9 deviations between Thomas and Roberts, our wager is settled (in my favor) at least so far as the two of them.

It's already time for the penultimate installment of our alignment summaries. There are now 64 signed rulings of the Supreme Court. We have just five cases left!

************************

Dixon v. United States

STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, GINSBURG, and ALITO, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a concurring opinion. ALITO, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, J., joined.

Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales

SOUTER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, GINSBURG, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Burlington, N. & S. F. R. Co. v. White

BREYER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.

Woodford v. Ngo

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER and GINSBURG, JJ., joined.

United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez

SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY and THOMAS, JJ., joined.

Kansas v. Marsh

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, and ALITO, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed a concurring opinion. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. SOUTER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined.

Washington v. Recuenco

THOMAS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, BREYER, and ALITO, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a concurring opinion. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, J., joined.

Randall v. Sorrell

BREYER, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., joined, and in which ALITO, J., joined as to all but Parts II–B–1 and II–B–2. ALITO, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which SCALIA, J., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. SOUTER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, J., joined, and in which STEVENS, J., joined as to Parts II and III.

Arlington Central School Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Murphy

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. GINSBURG, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. SOUTER, J., filed a dissenting opinion. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS and SOUTER, JJ., joined.

************************

So, after 64 signed rulings of the Supreme Court, 61 count for our purposes, with three excluded due to recusals. These were the discrepancies between Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas for the latest nine rulings:

In United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, Scalia issued the majority ruling while Roberts and Thomas both joined Alito's dissent.

In Randall v. Sorrell, Roberts joined Breyer's majority ruling (Roberts was the only other justice to join in full) while Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment that was joined by Scalia.

So, with two more departures between Roberts and Scalia, it would seem that our wager is settled in my favor:

Roberts/Scalia: 86.885% (agree in 53 of 61)
Roberts/Thomas: 83.607% (agree in 51 of 61)

Here are the three other alignment summaries tracked over the past installments:

Roberts/Kennedy: 81.967% (agree in 50 of 61)
Roberts/Souter: 70.492% (agree in 43 of 61)
Roberts/Alito: 86.666% (agree in 26 of 30)

The final installment will post once the last five rulings of the term have been issued. For the wrap-up I will calculate the alignment between Roberts and all the other justices that he served with on the Supreme Court this term. As a bonus, I'll do the same with Alito.

The percentage are nice but somewhat of arbitrary indication. Where the rubber hits the road is in a case like today's Kansas Death Penalty case. Alito and Roberts are no Souter. If O'Conner was still on the court, it might have gone the other way.

I completely agree with you on that!

Dandy Don Meredith did it best - Turn out the lights; the party's over.

Seriously, somebody should've done a bet with Ann. Her whole premise that Chief Justice Roberts would be the second coming of Justice Souter just got shot full of holes.