Thread by @OrinKerr

A lot of law professors write about Supreme Court developments. I wonder what legal scholarship about the Supreme Court looks like in a world of a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court, with 5 Justices unambiguous conservatives. Does it try to meet the Court where it is? Reject it? /1

Of course, many different scholars write about SCOTUS in diff ways, on different topics. I realize I'm painting with a broad brush. But I suppose my main interest is in the internalists -- the ones who write about doctrine, implicitly or expicitly recommending different paths. /2

How many will try to speak the Court's language, such as by echoing or recognizing originalist methods? How many will just be in opposition, especially in light of the circumstances of how the Court came to have its conservative supermajority ? /3

Will the focus turn to state constitutions? Or Congress? Or more external approaches, like those rooted in political science or empirical methods? Curious if others have thoughts. /end

UPDATE: Comments that are about the subject of the thread are particularly welcome.