In a surprising pivot from their recent, intensely debated tariffs decision, the U.S. Supreme Court justices injected a dose of humor into their proceedings, a stark contrast to their typical solemnity. During the oral arguments for *Enbridge Energy v. Nessel*, the justices shared a rare moment of self-deprecating jokes, momentarily stepping away from the usual judicial tension.

Justice Samuel Alito spearheaded the light-hearted exchange, pausing mid-sentence to gauge the room's reaction before jesting about the court’s goals. His remarks were met with laughter, signaling a welcome break from the usual rigorous court atmosphere. "Well, if — well — That’s certainly a goal to aim for," Alito said, prompting laughter from those present.

Adding to the banter, Justice Sonia Sotomayor chimed in, playfully commenting on their involvement in the previous case. "I felt very left out in the tariffs case. Justice Sotomayor didn’t write and I didn’t write opinions. But, if..." Alito remarked before Sotomayor interjected, "Maybe we’ll have a chance here."

This exchange represents a significant shift from the 170-page decision on tariffs, which was filled with internal disagreements aired in formal legal prose. The justices' acknowledgment of the need for brevity and perhaps a bit of levity in their work was a subtle nod to the critiques often aimed at their lengthy and complex opinions.

The courtroom’s response to this unexpected humor indicates a collective awareness of the sheer volume and often exhausting nature of judicial writings, which even the justices themselves recognize. Whether this moment of jest will translate into more concise legal opinions in the future remains to be seen. However, Justice Alito’s comment about aiming for concise goals has planted a seed of hope for more streamlined judicial outputs.

As the Supreme Court continues to handle weighty legal matters, this brief episode of jest might signal a new, if temporary, approach to dealing with the pressures of their responsibilities. Whether or not *Enbridge Energy v. Nessel* will result in a less verbose opinion is yet to be determined, but for now, the lighter tone is certainly a refreshing change.