Scorigami refers to sports final scores that have never occurred before. A similar concept, SCOTUSgami, tracks the first time a Supreme Court decision features a particular lineup of justices. Havana Docks Corp. v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. on May 21, 2026 produced a SCOTUSgami because a concurrence written by Justice Sotomayor and joined only by Justice Kavanaugh counted as a distinct lineup. The tracking rules differ from sports by not accounting for all votes, so a lone dissent by Justice Kagan does not affect the lineup result. Expanding the concept to full vote lineups would increase the number of SCOTUSgami outcomes initially, then reduce them over time.
"SCOTUSgami - the first time a decision features a particular lineup of justices. And it happened this week. Havana Docks Corp. v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (5-21-2026)Concurrence: Sotomayor, KavanaughSCOTUSgami! This is the 1st time this lineup has occurred in a SCOTUS opinion!- SCOTUSgami (@SCOTUS_gami) May 21, 2026"
"The guidelines for SCOTUSgami are a little different than the sports version. The author isn't taking all the votes into account, meaning Kagan's 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..."
"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 as distinct from just a Sotomayor, joined by Kavanaugh concurrence alone. It would certainly create a lot more SCOTUSgami results at first - and the account is clear that " they shouldn't be too frequent," but the thing about any -gami is that there will be a lot of them at first, gradually petering out."
Read at Above the Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]