In October 2004, we examined the jurisprudence of the Illinois Supreme Court to discern the Court’s outlook: was this an “activist” court, or one prone to judicial “restraint,” or did it fall somewhere in between? Our overall purpose was to discern whether the Court was exercising a truly judicial function—“to say what the law is”—without regard to outcome, or usurping legislative or executive functions that are the province of those other branches. Today, we revisit our prior analysis by examining some key decisions since 2004 that are illustrative of the Court’s current judicial philosophy.