I suspect Worlds lawyers may be going because it's very relevant and they can also learn some tidbits from listening in, not because they believe they can discern any outcome from lines of questioning.
As someone who has followed many scotus cases (as an example) over the years, you always see the pundits 'guessing' as to which way the courts will lean on decision. The only thing they generally have to use as their guide is political leaning (as at scotus that is a uselful guide).
Generally, lines of questioning don't really lead to an accurate view as to where a judge is leaning. On occasion it can there is no dispute.
As many learned the hard way with VRNG and Wallach and Mayer, the 101 line was a 'tell' so it CAN happen but in my experience seldom is it that obvious is all I am saying.
There is no way to 'prove' this either way, its opinion and wasn't mean to start a debate.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
