John G. Roberts, Jr.'s ideological leanings are complex and cannot be easily categorized along a simple conservative-liberal spectrum. While he has often sided with the conservative bloc on issues such as voting rights, campaign finance, and religious liberty, he has also joined or authored decisions that align with more liberal positions, such as upholding the Affordable Care Act and legalizing same-sex marriage. His emphasis on judicial restraint, institutional integrity, and the importance of precedent suggests a more nuanced approach to jurisprudence that sometimes crosses ideological lines. Roberts appears to prioritize the Court's reputation and the rule of law over a consistent ideological stance.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.'s jurisprudential philosophy is characterized by a commitment to judicial restraint, a respect for precedent (stare decisis), and a focus on the text of the law. He often takes a pragmatic approach that can lead to siding with either conservative or liberal justices, depending on the case. His rulings reflect a balance between conservative principles, such as a narrow interpretation of federal power, and a willingness to uphold certain expansive readings of laws when they align with his interpretation of the Constitution's text and principles. Roberts appears to prioritize the institutional integrity of the court and often seeks to avoid perceptions of the judiciary as politically driven.

The evidence suggests that Brett M. Kavanaugh generally places a high value on adhering to case precedent, often citing it in his opinions and dissents. He has shown respect for established legal doctrines and has often joined or written majority opinions that follow precedent. However, his respect for precedent is not absolute, as he has also expressed willingness to re-evaluate or clarify existing precedents when he believes it is warranted by the Constitution or legal principles.

Brett M. Kavanaugh's jurisprudential philosophy is characterized by a strong commitment to textualism and originalism, respect for precedent, and a conservative view on the role of the judiciary. He tends to favor a limited interpretation of federal power, is skeptical of broad agency authority, and supports executive power. His decisions often reflect a preference for clear, rule-based outcomes and a concern for the separation of powers.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh has demonstrated through his judicial record and past writings a tendency to support broad presidential powers. During his time on the D.C. Circuit Court and his tenure on the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh has often sided with arguments that favor executive authority. His writings, including his commentary on the investigation of President Bill Clinton and his expressed views during his time in the George W. Bush administration, suggest that he believes in a strong executive branch, which would likely extend to his opinions on the scope of presidential privileges.

Amy Coney Barrett's jurisprudential philosophy is characterized by her commitment to originalism and textualism, as evidenced by her academic writings, public statements, and judicial decisions. She has consistently shown a respect for precedent, though she is willing to re-evaluate or limit the scope of precedents she believes are not grounded in the Constitution's original meaning. Her decisions often reflect a conservative approach to constitutional interpretation, emphasizing the limited role of the judiciary, the importance of religious freedom, and the protection of Second Amendment rights.

Amy Coney Barrett, as a conservative jurist, has generally shown support for a strong separation of powers, which is consistent with her originalist interpretation of the Constitution. She has emphasized the importance of each branch of government staying within its constitutionally defined role. Her judicial record, including her opinions and writings, suggests that she is likely to continue to advocate for clear boundaries between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to prevent overreach and maintain checks and balances.