Bryer and barrett are right that the court isn't partisan right now. Barrett made this argument explicitly, li i have an originalistof judicial philosophy which leaves me to certain outcomes. It happens to be the case that the republican party may like those outcomes, but it's not because she is a partisan. Are there amples of her judicial philosophy leading to outcomes that conservatives don't like? I mean, one big recent example of a justice applying what they claim to be their judicial philosophy in a way that cut against their politics is on justice newel gorsuch wrote the opinion in bostock.