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.
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.