Prior research has noted the increase of concurrent and dissenting opinions issued by the U.S. Supreme Court. It has been argued that the proliferation of concurrent and dissenting opinions is symptomatic of an “individualistic” style of judging. This paper seeks to answer the question of whether individualism has also become manifest among the sitting Justices on the Supreme Court. It is argued that the number of personal references in Court opinions offers a linguistic clue as to how the Justices see themselves and the Court as an institution. The key issue is whether the sitting Justices see the current Court (and themselves) as an institutional body or as a fractionalized collection of individuals. A content analysis of Court opinions offers some support that an individualistic style of judging has increased over time.