The Chief Justice confesses that he wrote his opinion "hastily... and while my mind was occupied and wearied by the business of the day."

He expresses fear that "it is less concise and connected than it might otherwise have been," he admits that he hasn't referred to case law and merely noting that the various cases are "distinguishable," and though he doesn't detail what "the best writers on government and the rights of men" have written, he assures us that their "sentiments... harmonize with the principles" he's following.

That was Chief Justice John Jay, in 1793. Standards have changed since then, and these days the writings of the Supreme Court never concede that the Justice gave less than his all to the problem at hand. All the citations are meticulously laid out, and the supporting authorities are quoted tediously. We may grow weary reading what the judges write these days, but if they were weary too, they'd never tell. They're so afraid of being accused of sloppiness, that they earnestly enlist reporters to do PR work for them, assuring the public that they are hard at work, diligently solving complex legal problems according to the highest standards of professionalism.