<story><title>Supreme Court Strikes Down Defense of Marriage Act</title><url>http://projects.nytimes.com/live-dashboard/2013-06-26-supreme-court-gay-marriage#sha=f2fa9994b</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>danso</author><text>It is constantly surprising to me how nearly-deterministic these votes are: each respective quartet of the court votes along what&amp;#x27;s seen as party lines, with Kennedy being the swing vote. Is it because the court really is that partisan, or because the technicalities and details in each case fall sharply along judicial philosophical lines? With life terms, it&amp;#x27;s not as if the justices need to vote a certain way to keep office.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dragonwriter</author><text>&amp;gt; It is constantly surprising to me how nearly-deterministic these votes are, each respective quartet of the court votes along what&amp;#x27;s seen as party lines, with Kennedy being the swing vote&lt;p&gt;I think there is probably a bit of confirmation bias and media distortion here; plenty of Supreme Court decisions, even on high profile topics, aren&amp;#x27;t 5-4 or are 5-4 but don&amp;#x27;t break &amp;quot;conservative 4&amp;quot; + &amp;quot;liberal 4&amp;quot; + Kennedy (e.g., the decision uphold the Affordable Care Act [1] was 5-4, with &lt;i&gt;Roberts&lt;/i&gt; plus the four liberals in the majority, and the four remaining conservatives, including Kennedy, in the minority.) But for the months the case was before the Supreme Court, the media was harping on how it was bound to be 5-4 with Kennedy as the swing vote, so what do you think sticks more in people&amp;#x27;s minds -- the actual result that was highlighted on the day of the decision and then dropped, or the &amp;quot;everyone knows&amp;quot; that was a focus of attention for months?&lt;p&gt;And, on the decision letting stand the District Court decision [2] striking down Prop. 8 in California based on the Prop. 8 supporters lack of standing to appeal the decision, also announced today, the 5-4 decision had Roberts, Scalia, Ginsberg, Breyer, and Kagan in the majority with Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, and Sotomayor in the minority.&lt;p&gt;[1] NFIB v. Sebelius, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.supremecourt.gov&amp;#x2F;opinions&amp;#x2F;11pdf&amp;#x2F;11-393c3a2.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
[2] Hollingworth v. Perry, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-144_8ok0.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.supremecourt.gov&amp;#x2F;opinions&amp;#x2F;12pdf&amp;#x2F;12-144_8ok0.pdf&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>Supreme Court Strikes Down Defense of Marriage Act</title><url>http://projects.nytimes.com/live-dashboard/2013-06-26-supreme-court-gay-marriage#sha=f2fa9994b</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>danso</author><text>It is constantly surprising to me how nearly-deterministic these votes are: each respective quartet of the court votes along what&amp;#x27;s seen as party lines, with Kennedy being the swing vote. Is it because the court really is that partisan, or because the technicalities and details in each case fall sharply along judicial philosophical lines? With life terms, it&amp;#x27;s not as if the justices need to vote a certain way to keep office.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tptacek</author><text>The Prop 8 standing decision was Roberts, Scalia, Breyer, Ginsburg, and Kagan.</text></comment>