The National Journal quotes Professor Jane Schacter on the likely outcomes of same-sex marriage cases before the Supreme Court. 

The Supreme Court hasn’t even heard oral arguments yet in its landmark cases on same-sex marriage — so why is the case so often treated like marriage equality has already won?

In the run-up to a big Supreme Court case, lawyers, pundits, analysts, and reporters are usually full of what-ifs, complex theories about how one justice or another might be persuaded, and hair-splitting. But hardly any of that speculation has greeted the court’s cases on same-sex marriage, which sometimes are portrayed more as a coronation than a debate.

…

“I do think that is the prevailing sentiment. … There may be a little bit of cart before the horse,” Stanford University law professor Jane Schacter said.

…

Preventing upheaval in states that have already allowed same-sex marriage, by virtue of a court order, could be a factor in Kennedy’s thinking, Schacter said.

…

But that distinction isn’t conducive to the type of incremental decisions the court often prefers, Schacter said. She suspects both questions will have the same answer, one way or another.