What do you guys think of this article which compares the opinions in Bush vs. Gore with those in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White (the "do judges running for office have free speech" case) and concludes that the votes in Bush vs. Gore were principled and not political... I'm not sure I buy the argument on only one caseworth of evidence, but if we see another 5-4 decision like these two then perhaps there's something to it. (Of course the true cynic would say they decided this second case in order to justify to history that their first decision was principled... but i doubt enough people thought of the comparison for all 9 judges to do that...)