For one thing, there can be little doubt about what the argument is: a resort to unexpressed legislative intentions

— Justice Gorsuch dissenting in DELLIGATTI v. UNITED STATES

— showing how a colon can offset an incomplete clause

Make no mistake: The majority is choosing to cast aside the family’s interests.

— Justice Thomas (dissenting) in GLOSSIP v. OKLAHOMA

— showing how a colon turns two related sentences into one; and in this construction, the second sentence typically begins with a capital letter

Esteras says no; the Government says yes.

— Justice Barrett in ESTERAS v. UNITED STATES

— showing how a semicolon turns two related sentences into one; and in this construction, the second sentence begins with a lowercase letter

As for the statutory history: Advancing a specific theory of the congressional intent behind the Clean Water Act, the Court contends that EPA’s interpretation would revive the “backward-looking” policy regime that the Act was designed to replace.

— Justice Barrett dissenting in CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO v. EPA

— showing how the justices often ignore the traditional rule that a colon should follow only a complete clause

The retiree earns those benefits as an employee; therefore, the postemployment adverse action retroactively discriminates against that previously qualified individual.

—Justice Jackson dissenting in STANLEY v. CITY OF SANFORD

— showing two clauses combined with a semicolon, conjunctive adverb, and comma

The file contained a state investigator’s report that discussed two computer documents Rivers believed were related to his convictions; one document was labeled “of interest,” while the other was specifically described as “not child porn."

— Justice Jackson in RIVERS v. GUERRERO

— showing that a semicolon and a colon often function in the same way; here, a colon also works after “convictions.”

Stairs may prevent a wheelchair-bound person from accessing a public space; the lack of auxiliary aids may prevent a deaf person from accessing medical treatment at a public hospital; and braille-free ballots may preclude a blind person from voting, all without animus on the part of the city planner, the hospital staff, or the ballot designer.

— Justice Sotomayor concurring in A. J. T. v. OSSEO AREA SCHOOLS

— showing semicolons separating three complete clauses

Respondent presents two arguments for why we lack jurisdiction over today’s dispute about how Rivers’s second-in-time habeas filing should be characterized: first, that Rivers lacks standing because his injury is not redressable; and second, that the Court lacks habeas jurisdiction because Rivers’s child-pornography sentence has expired.

— Justice Jackson in RIVERS v. GUERRERO

— showing a colon following a complete clause and offsetting a list and showing a semicolon separating two items in a complicated list

Some amici also argue that the FDA violated our “major questions” doctrine. See, e.g., Brief for Vaping Industry Stakeholders as Amici Curiae 30–34; Brief for Thirteen Members of Congress et al. as Amici Curiae 6–13.

— Justice Jackson in RIVERS v. GUERRERO

— showing that semicolons separate items in a string citation sentence

— note that some citation styles require italics (omitted here for readability) and string citations are generally disfavored; they can show weight of authority but they are clunky