{"id":152886,"date":"2026-05-26T08:07:04","date_gmt":"2026-05-26T16:07:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/05\/26\/something-just-happened-at-the-supreme-court-that-has-never-happened-before\/"},"modified":"2026-05-26T08:07:04","modified_gmt":"2026-05-26T16:07:04","slug":"something-just-happened-at-the-supreme-court-that-has-never-happened-before","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/05\/26\/something-just-happened-at-the-supreme-court-that-has-never-happened-before\/","title":{"rendered":"Something Just Happened At The Supreme Court That Has NEVER Happened Before"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you\u2019re not familiar with the sports phenomenon of \u201cScorigami,\u201d it describes a situation where teams set a final score that has never happened before in the history of the sport. For instance, has an NFL game ever ended in a 40-40 tie? The answer is yes, and it happened for the first time last year when Green Bay and Dallas tied<\/a> on September 28th. <\/p>\n

There were four final scores in the NFL last year that had never occurred before.<\/p>\n

Now there\u2019s a Twitter account tracking SCOTUSgami<\/a> \u2014 the first time a decision features a particular lineup of justices. And it happened this week.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

Havana Docks Corp. v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (5-21-2026)<\/p>\n

Concurrence: Sotomayor, Kavanaugh<\/p>\n

SCOTUSgami! This is the 1st time this lineup has occurred in a SCOTUS opinion!<\/p>\n

\u2014 SCOTUSgami (@SCOTUS_gami) May 21, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

The guidelines for SCOTUSgami are a little different than the sports version. The author isn\u2019t taking all the votes into account, meaning Kagan\u2019s lone dissent here has no bearing on the SCOTUSgami. But a concurrence written by Sotomayor and joined only by Kavanaugh counts. A little more about the process\u2026<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

It would be interesting to expand the -gami out to full lineups, for instance recognizing the 6-3 of a Sotomayor, joined by Kavanaugh concurrence with Kagan dissent<\/em> as distinct from just a Sotomayor, joined by Kavanaugh concurrence alone. It would certainly create a lot more SCOTUSgami results at first \u2014 and the account is clear that \u201cthey shouldn\u2019t be too frequent<\/a>,\u201d but the thing about any -gami is that there will be a lot of them at first, gradually petering out. <\/p>\n

In any event, a fun new distraction for nerds watching the institution fall.<\/p>\n

\n

\"Headshot\"Joe Patrice<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. Feel free to\u00a0email<\/a> any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on\u00a0Twitter<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky<\/a> if you\u2019re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Something Just Happened At The Supreme Court That Has NEVER Happened Before<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(Photographer: Stefani Reynolds\/Bloomberg)\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

If you\u2019re not familiar with the sports phenomenon of \u201cScorigami,\u201d it describes a situation where teams set a final score that has never happened before in the history of the sport. For instance, has an NFL game ever ended in a 40-40 tie? The answer is yes, and it happened for the first time last year when Green Bay and Dallas tied<\/a> on September 28th. <\/p>\n

There were four final scores in the NFL last year that had never occurred before.<\/p>\n

Now there\u2019s a Twitter account tracking SCOTUSgami<\/a> \u2014 the first time a decision features a particular lineup of justices. And it happened this week.<\/p>\n

The guidelines for SCOTUSgami are a little different than the sports version. The author isn\u2019t taking all the votes into account, meaning Kagan\u2019s lone dissent here has no bearing on the SCOTUSgami. But a concurrence written by Sotomayor and joined only by Kavanaugh counts. A little more about the process\u2026<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

It would be interesting to expand the -gami out to full lineups, for instance recognizing the 6-3 of a Sotomayor, joined by Kavanaugh concurrence with Kagan dissent<\/em> as distinct from just a Sotomayor, joined by Kavanaugh concurrence alone. It would certainly create a lot more SCOTUSgami results at first \u2014 and the account is clear that \u201cthey shouldn\u2019t be too frequent<\/a>,\u201d but the thing about any -gami is that there will be a lot of them at first, gradually petering out. <\/p>\n

In any event, a fun new distraction for nerds watching the institution fall.<\/p>\n

\n

\"Headshot\"Joe Patrice<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. Feel free to\u00a0email<\/a> any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on\u00a0Twitter<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky<\/a> if you\u2019re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If you\u2019re not familiar with the sports phenomenon of \u201cScorigami,\u201d it describes a situation where teams set a final score that has never happened before in the history of the sport. For instance, has an NFL game ever ended in a 40-40 tie? The answer is yes, and it happened for the first time last […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-152886","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/152886","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=152886"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/152886\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=152886"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=152886"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=152886"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}