Yeah, I don't I wish I knew right now. But you know what I, I, some of the others in there, in addition to the Census one I detail a pact between Justice Kennedy and the chief back in 2017, into a gay rights cases that followed the follow two years after Obergefell versus Hodges, where what I found interesting what I learned of the to the negotiations between Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy, I'm glad to get that information. But I also found it all the more interesting because Justice Kennedy had written the landmark ruling declaring that same sex couples had a constitutional right to marriage. And the chief had dissented and used his first and only ever dissent from the bench to protest that decision. But you know, again, as I say, of the Chief Justice Roberts, he's always recalibrating and trying to figure out what's the best way to operate to get what he wants. And in that case, he realized, you know, if you can beat them, join them. And He then worked with Justice Kennedy to get what he wanted, and some follow up cases on gay legal rights. What's going on now? Okay, so you have there are certain justices who lend themselves to this kind of negotiation. And you know, one thing I say in my piece that I wrote about Sandra Day O'Connor in the Bush v Gore papers, after studying Justice O'Connor, so deeply back, you know, in the early 2000s, I realized her Mo was to get out early, and often she would, before they even held oral arguments before anybody had circulated draft opinions. She was buttonholing colleagues, she was always getting out early to try to figure out where did where did she think the case should go, based on her reading of the facts and the law? And how could she get the result she wanted? So she was she was given to that. Chief Justice Roberts, I think is an incredibly strategic thinker and is given to a version of that. Justice Kagan, certainly, Justice Breyer, from his days in the Senate was always trying to think about, where can we find common ground here? And you know, when you're on the liberal side, that's, that's your best move? Because you have you don't have the votes. So So do I think, I think probably a version of that is naturally going to be going on just because that's the nature of small group decision making. But we don't have the same kinds of people who might be as adept evets working now, first of all, you really don't have a set her we don't have a center anymore. Because because it is, you know, it's a six three court, and the chief has an interest in creating some sort of center for the for institutional reasons at the court. But he's gonna, you know, he'll get he'll obviously get those on the left to work with him at times because they don't have much more anywhere else to go. But will he be able to lower back justice Cavanaugh, who seemed to be an early partner of his will he be able to make headway with Amy Kony Barrett? I don't know. I mean, he's got his background is not on like Amy Coney Barrett's in some ways. He was reared in Indiana, you know, she spent a lot of time there. And in South Bend, he's always been a Notre Dame fan. He's you know, so they have, they have some points of some points of personal connection that he might not share with all the other justices. But I have to say, I don't have a strong handle yet on exactly how justice Barrett operates. I'm always looking for new data points about her approach is