That being said, just because judges have a pretty good idea of what the outcome is doesn't mean that they're *necessarily* doing it in bad faith:
1. In cases of first impression a judge may have to go with an "educated gut instinct" and build argument around it;
2. Conversely in cases involving black-letter principles a judge may instinctively be able to tell what the right answer is and need only find the exact authorities afterwards.
(I know we're talking about slightly different things - and I agree with you that some judges/justices do indeed just take a viewpoint that they like/agree with and build an argument, warping a good-faith understanding of the law if needs be, to suit it).
To some extent - it depends.
That being said, just because judges have a pretty good idea of what the outcome is doesn't mean that they're *necessarily* doing it in bad faith:
1. In cases of first impression a judge may have to go with an "educated gut instinct" and build argument around it;
2. Conversely in cases involving black-letter principles a judge may instinctively be able to tell what the right answer is and need only find the exact authorities afterwards.
(I know we're talking about slightly different things - and I agree with you that some judges/justices do indeed just take a viewpoint that they like/agree with and build an argument, warping a good-faith understanding of the law if needs be, to suit it).