Turns out that a good way to predict how the US Supreme Court will rule is by counting the number of questions asked to either side.  The winning side will be the one with the fewest questions asked.  Is this because

  1. the justices have made up their minds already and ask more questions of the losing side, or
  2. more questions put the lawyer on the defensive, weakening his position?

That is, does outcome cause the questions or the other way around?  I think it has to be the fomer, indeed the latter eventually implies the former.  If questioning per se made a side weaker, then the justices would learn this and would realize that their questions were generating more heat than light.  Once they realize this, they will know that the only way to get their side to win would be to ask more questions of the other side.