What has become clear over the past 100 years or so is that people have ideas, and they work to find logic to support them working backwards. Laws all need interpretation, there's no way around it. And by ideas, it appears to mean ethical frameworks these days. The interpretation of laws is very much based on the ethical framework of a person even if they possess the same logic.
The proxy for the parties then become the judicial versions of literal constitutionalism (Republicans today, more literal typically means more conservative) and statutory interpretation (liberals), which then cause a clear split in conclusion for many cases, increasingly so.
This is a natural reflection of American society slowly drifting and polarizing into two groups of thought, and judges are human minds, not computers.
The proxy for the parties then become the judicial versions of literal constitutionalism (Republicans today, more literal typically means more conservative) and statutory interpretation (liberals), which then cause a clear split in conclusion for many cases, increasingly so.
This is a natural reflection of American society slowly drifting and polarizing into two groups of thought, and judges are human minds, not computers.