OP misses the larger point - and Justice Thomas made it well - he gave answer to those who argue that the case was moot because it wouldn't change the outcome - Thomas says "so what, it still must be addressed if only for the future's sake if nothing else!"
OP misses the larger point - and Justice Thomas made it well - he gave answer to those who argue that the case was moot because it wouldn't change the outcome - Thomas says "so what, it still must be addressed if only for the future's sake if nothing else!"
They can't really make that judgement without looking at the evidence though, so it shows their not an impartial judge already.