Perhaps we ought to start referring to Sonia Sotomayer and Elena Kagan as Judges Fiddle and Faddle, or perhaps Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

New York Post:

The newest members of the nation's highest court -- local Obama appointees Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan -- have agreed with each other in all 23 cases they've voted on, which is a supreme rarity, observers said.

Liberal critics who deride the Supreme Court's rightward shift over the past 10 years have cited conservative alliances like "Scalito," Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito.

But Scalia and Alito have agreed with each other in only 84 percent of cases in the current term, which winds up this month.

Legal scholars find the Sotomayor-Kagan mind meld a bit unusual but hardly shocking.

"The pattern of agreement is typically based on ideology or a view of the law," said professor Barry Friedman of NYU Law School. "It's not that surprising that Barack Obama's two appointees showed agreement."

But the New York twins don't just agree in general terms. Justices can agree fully or partially in a case, depending on whether they write a separate concurring or dissenting opinion. Often two justices will come to the same general conclusion for very different reasons.

Sotomayor, who joined the court two years ago, and Kagan, who began serving last October, agreed fully 91 percent of the time.

By contrast, the duo of Scalia and Alito agree fully only 59% of the time.

It's nice to have such independent thinkers sitting on the Supreme Court, isn't it? In truth, this points up how ridiculously easy it is to be a liberal. You don't really have to think very much at all. Liberals have a Pavlovian emotional response to just about everything so it's simply a matter of finding the right emotional hot button to get the proper result. "Social justice," "fairness," "for the children" usually does the trick. Liberals respond in universal ways to those code words and I suspect something similar is at work at the court.