But what about the others? Are they likely to respect precedent and rule of law?

Got me. I don't practice in front of the Court, and only know as much about their jurisprudence as any interested 'hobbyist' would be. So apart from the rather surface observations that most people have made (Thomas and Alito are conservative, Jackson and Sotomayor are liberal, etc.), I don't have any particular insight.

I will say that many of the issues that are heading their way are really....weird issues, in the sense that they involve questions that Court members haven't really spoken about much. For example, most people had a pretty good idea where many of the Justices' heads were at on the question of Chevron deference - that questions been at the center of a lot of legal scholarship, several of the Justices had given their thoughts on Chevron in prior opinions and dissents, etc. But the issues raised in the Abrego Garcia case, or the issue of the scope of injunctions where one party (the U.S.) is interacting will millions of people on any given disputed point of law, or the Citizenship clause in the 14th Amendment....these are not issues that have been well-chewed before making it to the Court.