Nah. The court is pretty heavily Textualist and/or Originalist with Justice Thomas at the Originalist extreme and Justice Gorsuch at the Textualist extreme, bu

Nah. The court is pretty heavily Textualist and/or Originalist with Justice Thomas at the Originalist extreme and Justice Gorsuch at the Textualist extreme, but along the less Institutional axis you have Justices Thomas, Gorsuch and Alito and along the more Institutionalist end you have Chief Justice Roberts (at the extreme) and Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett. The liberal Justices tend to get lumped together, but it’s worth noting a couple of details: the original formulation of the theory of the 3-3-3 court was with Justice Breyer who retired and was replaced by Justice Jackson. Justice Kagan is probably the most Institutionalist of these 3 and has always had an excellent rapport with the Federalist Society, Justice Sotomeyer in my estimation has always been the one most likely to defer to the Executive branch when they are a party to a case (but I formed that opinion during the Obama administration, it may not have aged well and I should re-examine it regardless) and I don’t feel confident in the slightest giving a good assessment of Justice Jackson without seeing more from her, I barely feel like we’ve seen enough from Justice Barrett and some think she might be more with the Thomas and Gorsuch end than with the Chief and Kavanaugh going by this current term which would make this a 4-2-3 court instead. Long story short, it’s nuanced but all most people see is who appointed who and the final tally in cases with heavier partisan splits, but the manner in which a case was decided (the controlling opinion in other words) matters more for future jurisprudence than the judgement itself which is important primarily to the parties involved. Given a choice, Roberts pushes for cases to be decided as narrowly as possible, but that’s harder to do when he’s more likely to be the 6th vote than the 5th vote.