The Supreme Court’s Swing Justices: Kavanaugh, Barrett, and the Chief Justice

Mathew Habib - Chief

January 2026

When people talk about the Supreme Court, they often frame it as a simple split between conservatives and liberals. In reality, some of the most important decisions come down to just a few justices who do not always vote the same way. These are the Court’s swing justices.

Right now, the most influential swing justices are Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Chief Justice John Roberts.

That does not mean they are moderates. It means their votes are the least predictable within the conservative majority, and in a closely divided Court, unpredictability equals power.

Chief Justice John Roberts has long been seen as the Court’s institutionalist. He is deeply concerned with the Court’s legitimacy and public trust. In high-profile cases, especially those involving elections, executive power, and the Court’s image, Roberts sometimes sides with the liberal justices to avoid rulings that could damage the Court’s credibility.

Roberts is not a liberal, but he is cautious. He often prefers narrow rulings and incremental change over sweeping decisions. I think that instinct explains why he occasionally breaks from the conservative bloc. His goal is not ideological balance, but stability.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh occupies a different role. He is often the median vote in cases involving administrative power, religious liberty, and criminal procedure. While his overall record is conservative, he sometimes sides with the liberal justices on issues like agency authority and due process.

Kavanaugh tends to focus heavily on precedent. When he believes a conservative outcome would require a sharp break from prior case law, he is more likely to hesitate. That makes him a swing justice in cases where legal continuity is at stake.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett is the most complex of the three. Early on, many assumed she would vote reliably with the Court’s conservative wing. In practice, her record has been more nuanced. While she is firmly conservative on issues like abortion and religious freedom, she has occasionally sided with liberals in cases involving federal procedure, statutory interpretation, and limits on executive power.

Barrett approaches cases as an academic. She is methodical, text-focused, and often skeptical of arguments that stretch statutory language. That skepticism sometimes places her in alignment with liberal justices, even when the political outcome surprises people.

What makes these three justices “swing” is not moderation, but selectivity. Each has areas where they are more willing to break ranks. In a Court with a strong conservative majority, those moments can decide outcomes.

I think it is important for young people to understand this dynamic. The Supreme Court is not just about ideology. It is also about institutional concerns, legal philosophy, and how individual justices see their role.

Watching how Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Chief Justice Roberts vote tells us a lot about where the Court is headed and where there is still room for constraint. Swing justices may not drive the Court left, but they can slow, narrow, or shape conservative change.

In a system where five votes decide everything, that influence matters.