It's Supreme Court season.

It happens every June.

We all hover around our computers and in absolute terror, wait to see what fresh hell Scotus brings us.

Mark Joseph Stern covers the Supreme Court for Slate.

And in June, the justices come up against a big deadline, their own vacations.

Before they go, they like to leave the American public with a little parting gift.

Opinions.

Always the biggest ones, right?

And so we know they're coming, but we don't know exactly on which day.

Yeah, I picture, you know, around Memorial Day, everyone else starts barbecuing and going to the

pool, and you start sitting by your computer drinking soilent and coffee.

Yes, that is a fairly accurate picture of me, replace the soylent with Xanax for the really big decisions.

I called it Mark because this year's big rulings are just beginning to trickle out.

Some of them seem pretty technical, wonky even.

But Mark says if you read these decisions, they have a way of upending what you think you might

know about the Supremes.

A lot of SCOTUS watchers, myself included, quite frequently fall prey to the Democrat and

Republican lens of looking at the court.

But when you're analyzing kind of interesting or quirky cases like these,

that all falls away and you get to spend more time

digging into the ideology that is genuinely separated from partisan politics.

It really screws up your bingo square, I think, which is a lot of fun for me because it's always a delight to try to assess why in the world Gorsuch and Ginsburg are on the same page here, why Thomas voted with the liberals, you know, all of that stuff. That is my jam, pretty much.

...