Comment by js2

I omitted a key bit of context:

> Given that Justices are permitted to, and frequently do, interrupt advocates, Scalia’s interruption was a breach of that norm, prioritizing both the advocate’s response and his own interest above that of Sotomayor’s inquiry. The effect of this breach was that Sotomayor’s question went unaddressed, as Rein instead responded to Scalia’s demands. One may look at the significant discrepancies in seniority and ideology between Scalia and Sotomayor, however, and surmise that the interruption could be the effect of such differences.

The paper is 108 pages containing dozens of examples and two empirical analysis. The datasets are publicly available if you find fault with its methods. I wouldn't judge it based on my apparently poor job of providing a couple examples.