Below is my column in USA Today on the leaking of the draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. I previously discussed the “stench” raised by Justice Sotomayor and how it smelled like mendacity to blame her three new colleagues. Now that stench is overwhelming not only due to the intentional leaking of the opinion but the defense of the leaker by many in the press. The leaker is being called “brave” and a “hero” by many on the left. While denouncing what they see as the Court abandoning its principles, they are celebrating someone who violated every ethical and professional principle in leaking this draft opinion.
Here is the column:
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor surprised many court watchers in December during the oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization when she complained about the “stench” of politics pervading the case over abortion rights.
The stench became overwhelming Monday night when Politico published a leaked copy of a working draft of the majority opinion in Dobbs.
Chief Justice John Roberts verified the draft’s authenticity Tuesday and launched an investigation.
The leak in the abortion case was a despicable act that shocked even the most cynical in Washington.
The draft opinion, if left unchanged, would sweep away Roe v. Wade and decades of precedent. The draft’s author, Justice Samuel Alito, declares, “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
This draft and the alignment of justices can change.
What will not change is that stench. The court has lost a type of institutional innocence in maintaining confidentiality through decades of hard-fought and heated legal disputes.
Court was island of confidentiality
Even in a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks, the Supreme Court has long been an island of integrity and confidentiality. It was an inviolate rule that members and clerks do not leak either the deliberations or decisions of the court.
Indeed, for those of us who have covered and written about the nation’s highest court for decades, we never thought this day would come.
This was clearly a politically calculated act by someone who was willing to abandon every ethical and professional principle for a political cause. There is no obvious reason to leak other than to unleash outside pressure on the court and to try to push Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act to codify Roe v. Wade.
If that was the purpose, it seems quickly realized as figures like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., used the leak to call for not just the passage of the federal law but for killing the filibuster as well: “Congress must pass legislation that codifies Roe v. Wade as the law of the land in this country NOW. And if there aren’t 60 votes in the Senate to do it, and there are not, we must end the filibuster to pass it with 50 votes.”
It is doubtful the leaker expected to coerce a change in votes on the court. It is certainly true that a tentative opinion can change dramatically over the countless drafts sent between chambers. It is common for majority opinions to become dissents or to fracture in a plurality decision as justices work through the issues.
However, this leak makes such second thoughts less likely, not more.
According to Politico’s reporting, Alito was initially joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Any change in the vote would now leave the impression that the court could be manipulated through outside pressure. Indeed, if Roberts was on the fence, this leak, if anything, might push him back toward the right of the court.
Faced with such a raw political act, justices are more likely to dig in than abandon their initial votes.
This leak was a move directed at Congress and the midterm elections. In some ways, that makes it even worse.
Politics is the forbidden fruit of judicial ethics. Yet it is a temptation that has been resisted through the years despite the Supreme Court being located across the street from Congress in the middle of a city where politics is the primary industry.
Injection of politics
Sotomayor’s complaint of the “stench” of politics in December was viewed by some of us as a departure from the decorum of the court. She was referring to how the three new members were widely viewed as having been nominated to reverse Roe and other cases by sheer force of numbers. It was itself the injection of politics into the deliberations.
Before the argument, Sotomayor shocked many in calling upon students to campaign against abortion laws in anticipation of pending abortion cases before the court. She declared in October, “You know, I can’t change Texas’ law, but you can and everyone else who may or may not like it can go out there and be lobbying forces in changing laws that you don’t like.”
It now appears that someone with access to internal deliberations of the court decided to find a way to be an instrument of change in a way that will leave a stench for many years to come. Few of us believe that any of the justices would countenance such an unethical act. The investigation instead will focus on the judicial clerks and staff of the court – an investigation that will shatter the court’s collegial and sheltered culture.
One thing is now certain. The court will never be the same. There is a loss of innocence in all of this, a realization that the court is no longer immune from politics.
It is a moment like the one described by physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer at the realization of the atomic bomb: “In some sort of crude sense which no vulgarity, no humor, no overstatement can quite extinguish, (we) have known sin; and this is a knowledge which (we) cannot lose.”
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors.
The Supreme Court leaker still hasn’t been ID’ed.
There is some good news:
The United States has provided intelligence about Russian units that has allowed Ukrainians to target and kill many of the Russian generals who have died in action in the Ukraine war, according to senior American officials.
Ukrainian officials said they have killed approximately 12 generals on the front lines, a number that has astonished military analysts.
Was that announcement from the Azov Battalion?
The Supreme Court leaker still hasn’t been ID’ed.
Oh, the Chief Justice knows, He’s just not releasing the name. Yet
Don’t confuse your conjecture with knowledge.
This was a deliberate and calculated POLITICAL move and if it results in a political victory for the left, it will not only continue but intensify. Nothing is safe at this point from the eventual ruination by the left to achieve their ultimate goal. What this reminds me of is the destruction of the Great Buddhas of Bamiyan at the hands of the islamists. They are about sweeping out the old and creating a brave new world based, unfortunately, on failed and grimy principles pounded into their noggins through lifetimes of indoctrination to an ideology long held out as the perfect cure for humanity. Ha!
We do, and should forever on, expect just this low level of “ends justifying the means” actions by an ideological horde. Very similar in their use of thuggery, violence, deception and extreme adherence to a fanatical belief system to any self-respecting islamic jihadist, we are in a struggle against, not a political party, but a “religion” of self-righteous inquisitors who will stop at nothing to achieve total adherence to the faith. Do not forget, these are not political actors, for the most part, they are religious zealots.
You’re talking about Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett, right?
No – I’m talking about people like you.
Leave it to the Democrats to destroy yet another US institution. Is there any doubt that it was someone in Sotomayor’s office who leaked the court’s draft opinion? It was Sotomayor who previously called for students to protest abortion laws, and she clearly believes that activism trumps the law. So much for “diversity” instead of integrity and competence.
Giocon1,
You don’t know who leaked. Nobody does. Why aren’t you celebrating this momentous occasion. Abortion will no longer be legal in all states. Now conservatives can create even more restrictions with abandon. There’s already talk about banning travel to states where it’s still legal.
The leak is irrelevant. It’s the promises Thst were kept that matter, right?
The press is “celebrating someone who violated every ethical and professional principle in leaking this draft opinion.”
That is the left. The left celebrates illegal activities that are destructive to the nation. This atrocious act did nothing except destroy unless those involved thought that intimidation and threats are how a democracy functions. Now the left is using this illegal act to promote all types of activity in the legislature. I don’t know how anyone with even a minimum of understanding doesn’t understand the left side of the aisle is engaging in criminal activity meant to destroy democracy and our Constitutional Republic.
Democrat messaging was prepared and well coordinated after the news broke. Some had fundraising schemes geared up and ready to go.
There is reporting that the White House had at least some advance warning. Probably the Politico reporter who conspired with the leaker gave them a heads up. Then it seems either Politico, the leaker, or the White House alerted certain Democrats it was coming so they could prepare their messaging strategy.
That is a good point. We see evidence that the left knows of what will happen and prepares for it in advance all over the world. I remember, but not in detail, how, after contrived incidents, protest signs and flags (Where were they purchased?) were immediately available. I loved the finishing touches. The protestors didn’t know the English language, but many protest signs were written in English.
They had the signs printed and passed out all over the country. How convenient.
S. Meyer,
“ That is the left. The left celebrates illegal activities that are destructive to the nation.”
The right celebrating the jan 6 insurrection is worse. It was an illegal activity, it was destructive both literally and rhetorically. Many have been charged as criminals. The right celebrating criminals is a long cherished tradition.
Leaks from the Supreme Court are not unprecedented. They were commonplace until Roberts became Chief Justice. Even the Roe decision was leaked in 73’.
Why aren’t you celebrating with joy that Roe is going to be repealed? Isn’t that the whole point of appointing pro-life judges?
“The right celebrating the jan 6 insurrection is worse.”
No, that is a perversion of the left. Take note of how it wasn’t an insurrection. Take note of how no one was killed in the Capitol Building except a 105-pound female who posed no threat to anyone. Take note of how Pelosi is not releasing her communications regarding the incident. Take note of how none of the leftists were arrested and jailed without bail. Take note how people on the FBI list of wanted suddenly disappeared from the list even though they could be seen as instigators. Take note of how those same people had a connection to the FBI.
Yes, Jan 6 requires a complete and total investigation to assess what happened. The fantasies in your mind are fantasies, and the knowledge you present is useless, as proven numerous times in the past.
A. Meyer,
“ Take note of how none of the leftists were arrested and jailed without bail.”
That’s because there were no leftists there. Why would leftists try to stop the electoral count which would have been in their favor? Looks like your critical thinking skills are falling short.
“ Take note of how it wasn’t an insurrection.”
It was. Just because YOU don’t believe it doesn’t make it any less true. How about an attempted coup?
“ Take note of how no one was killed in the Capitol Building except a 105-pound female who posed no threat to anyone.”
5 people died including a law enforcement officer. Babbitt died because she was breaking the law and ignoring law enforcement warnings. You don’t want to get shot? Obey law enforcement OR don’t commit crimes.
“ Take note of how Pelosi is not releasing her communications regarding the incident.”
Neither is Trump, hey if trump doesn’t have to neither does Pelosi. She was not the one cheering on the insurrection like trump.
“ Take note how people on the FBI list of wanted suddenly disappeared from the list even though they could be seen as instigators. Take note of how those same people had a connection to the FBI.”
That old conspiracy theory was debunked a long time ago. It went the same way claims it was Antifa and BLM.
“ Yes, Jan 6 requires a complete and total investigation to assess what happened.“
That would be nice, but republicans are not cooperating with the investigation, especially those who may be involved in planning it.
Svelaz, you are a waste of time.
“That’s because there were no leftists there. ”
You are unable to learn. Many times links to the pictures and stories regarding people outside of the right on Jan 6 were posted. I do not need to repeat what has been repeated that many times. If you are too stupid to pay attention, live with your stupidity.
“It was.” an insurrection,
How Stupid can you be? There were no guns in the building. The supposed insurrectionists were taking selfies. Some misbehaved and should pay an appropriate penalty. You use words without understanding what they mean. I feel I am talking to a six-year-old.
“I pointed out the fact that the leak was not criminal. ”
More stupidity. I don’t know what legal charges can be placed, but well-respected others think there are. I’ll wait for the experts to sort things out. I explained this to Enigma, who at least has a brain. You can read the full article at https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/roe-v-wade-supremem-court-leak-investigated-crime-andrew-mccarthy
That is one of many with that opinion. The author of this article is well-respected and understands criminal law. You can look up who he is.
“5 people died including a law enforcement officer.”
You cannot even stay on topic. Within the Capitol Building, only one person died, and that was the 105-pound unarmed woman who was no threat to anyone. One of the police officers died of natural causes. One of the other protestors died under uncertain circumstances. A police officer may have beaten her or was part of her cause of death. I can’t provide accuracy for any left out, so I won’t mention them. Your response was stupid.
“Babbitt died because she was breaking the law and ignoring law enforcement warnings.”
She was killed against standard police policy.
We have seen what happens when police officers are faced with responding to threats on their person. We see leftist rioting, arson, looting and killing. That is what you support. But when it comes to an unarmed individual, you don’t like, and who is not a threat, you will kill at the drop of a hat. You are a barbaric hypocrite, along with being totally ignorant.
“Neither is Trump,”
Pelosi is using Congress to get his information without releasing hers. She was the one who failed to protect the Capitol Building. She was at the top of the chain of command.
Congress should release everything, including all the videos and every correspondence of Pelosi’s with anyone connected to Jan 6. I also think the complete interrogation of the officer that killed Babbitt should be released, and a new independent investigation be performed. Total transparency. Get your dictionary and look up the words transparency and total.
“That old conspiracy theory was debunked”
That is only in your imagination, and your head otherwise is almost entirely empty.
“That would be nice, but republicans are not cooperating”
All Pelosi has to do is start releasing hers and let the taxpayer force all to release theirs.
I do not like being this offensive, but I think it is time to make sure you start to recognize your lack of ability. Others were right when they told me I was being foolish in engaging with you.
SM
“You are unable to learn. … If you are too stupid to pay attention, live with your stupidity. … How Stupid can you be? … You use words without understanding what they mean. I feel I am talking to a six-year-old. … More stupidity. … I explained this to Enigma, who at least has a brain. … We see leftist rioting, arson, looting and killing. That is what you support. But when it comes to an unarmed individual, you don’t like, and who is not a threat, you will kill at the drop of a hat. You are a barbaric hypocrite, along with being totally ignorant. … That is only in your imagination, and your head otherwise is almost entirely empty. … I think it is time to make sure you start to recognize your lack of ability. …”
Allan S. Meyer, you claim “I do not like being this offensive.”
But I think you love being that offensive. Comments like the above show you to be a vile troll.
I think you choose to be that offensive because you enjoy it.
I think you’re unwilling to control your desire to be offensive.
Anonymous the Stupid, people like you have the Stalinist, Hitler, and Mao genes where, if led in the wrong direction, will be willing parts of the killing machines. I have seen enough death for one lifetime, so you and I will never agree. You lived your relatively comfortable life no matter what your prior generations suffered. Somewhere you blocked out the horrors of the victims and chose to be part of the victimizer class.
“Anonymous the Stupid, people like you have the Stalinist, Hitler, and Mao genes where, if led in the wrong direction, will be willing parts of the killing machines. … you blocked out the horrors of the victims and chose to be part of the victimizer class.”
Allan S. Meyer,
As I said: I think you love being that offensive. Comments like the above show you to be a vile troll.
I think you choose to be that offensive because you enjoy it.
I think you’re unwilling to control your desire to be offensive.
“As I said: I think you love being”
From what I have gleaned from everything you have written and every lie you have made, I see you for what you are. Deep down, you are not a good person, which comes out loud and clear. I am only repeating what I see. Hitler didn’t kill that many people without the support of people willing to do his bidding. You should keep your tendencies better hidden, ATS.
Allan S. Meyer gets off on posting nasty insults.
Here’s a sampling from this column of insults he’s addressed to more than one person:
“You are unable to learn. … If you are too stupid to pay attention, live with your stupidity. … How Stupid can you be? … You use words without understanding what they mean. I feel I am talking to a six-year-old. … More stupidity. … I explained this to Enigma, who at least has a brain. … We see leftist rioting, arson, looting and killing. That is what you support. But when it comes to an unarmed individual, you don’t like, and who is not a threat, you will kill at the drop of a hat. You are a barbaric hypocrite, along with being totally ignorant. … That is only in your imagination, and your head otherwise is almost entirely empty. … I think it is time to make sure you start to recognize your lack of ability. …”
“Anonymous the Stupid, people like you have the Stalinist, Hitler, and Mao genes where, if led in the wrong direction, will be willing parts of the killing machines. … you blocked out the horrors of the victims and chose to be part of the victimizer class.”
“Deep down, you are not a good person, which comes out loud and clear.”
“That you act as if tearing apart a viable child limb by limb only demonstrates how sub-human you are.”
“Dumb. … Are you too stupid to recognize … More stupidity. … And more stupidity.”
“Of course, you and your friends find it a happy event when an illegal rapist enters the country to rape and kill American citizens. … You never cease in your abilities to make yourself look like a fool.”
“Your intellect is very thin if it exists. … A six-year-old can do better than you.”
“Your self-serving arguments make you look like an idiot.”
Here’s a sampling from his comments on one other column of insults he addressed to more than one person:
“Your words betray an ignorance undiscovered by yourself. … You have a lazy mind.”
“ATS does not support free speech. He is a fascist of the Stalin / Mao type.”
“Anonymous the Stupid is getting ready to sue the Turley blog. Let’s all get ready to laugh. Get that dog sh1t off my back lawn.”
“You are a fool … you are collecting dog Sh1t and packaging it.”
“There is no proof that will convince you of anything. Your eyes and ears do not count when the brain is soft and mushy. The mush prevails while the truth doesn’t.”
“I have demonstrated you lying even when the documents are produced right in front of your silly face. … you have chosen to prove yourself a liar.”
“You are dumber than sin.”
“Stupidity is what you demonstrate daily … [Try] removing your head from your A$$.”
“the intelligence of a birdbrain.”
“You chose to act like a fool, and you have chosen to lie”
“Anonymous the Stupid, you got 50% right which approximates your critical thinking skills. It is not a passing grade but far better than Svelaz’s whose critical thinking skills are somewhere around 0%.”
“you are an abusive person … You deceive and lie.”
“his posts are based on regurgitated superficial knowledge”
“You are a fascist of the Stalinist or Mao type even if you don’t choose to recognize it. … [you] lie and deceive. Most of the time, your statements are shallow. You are obviously are regurgitating leftist talking points provided in much of the media.”
“to the Borg (Democrats) what you say is meaningless”
“you are more transparent than you think. We know your modus operandi, deny, deny, and deny while you lie and deceive. Your motto: Always blame someone else for your Stupidity”
I comment on who you are. Who was Ashli Babbit? To ATS, she was a “stupid woman.”She was killed, and to ATS, she deserved it. According to ATS Jan6, people were rightfully arrested, and they could be incarcerated without bail and placed in solitary even though there was no evidence of violent activity. Example: Nordean.
Do we need more? There are lots more, and ATS has no defense. In a Stalinist regime, the ATS persona would be upper management showing everyone how to lie and deceive to increase the number incarcerated and killed. It would not be the usual individual in fear of his life. It would be his career choice.
ATS: When you moved the goalposts to discuss firearms, you forget that you were wrong in their use and the injuries/ deaths to law enforcement. The only person shot and killed was Ashli Babbitt, who you called a Stupid Woman. She was shot almost point-blank with her arms and legs spread apart in full view. You were deceptive about who was in the room she was entering and the risk she created to Congress. You knew nothing about her, her motives or what she was trying to do. You don’t care that the details of her death have not been adequately released. To you, despite the apology, she is just a Stupid Woman.
You also argued about how the protestors entered the building. Today with the videos on display, we can see the Capitol police letting the protestors enter the building. Of course, that moves your goalposts again because, according to you previously, all the arrested protestors did something wrong. Now, with the videos available, we see a protestor getting off because the judge found he did nothing wrong, which was proven in the videos. With the knowledge that people can be proven innocent based on video recordings, you place another roadblock into their proof. You argue against releasing the White House videos and then say that they may not contain material evidence. Another backward and deceitful argument against the Brady Law material argument which would lead to a fairer trial. That is expected from you because you are a fascist who seems to desire violence to further his cause. (Ahsli Babbitt is partial proof of that opinion) Damn the videos, says ATS, move full speed ahead to prosecute and convict people, innocent or not; to the h-ll with the Brady Law and anyone that believes differently than the Fuhrer.
When you asked for a court case showing where Trump had won, ‘just one case,’ in court, you moved the goalposts because you were given that one case and ran away until faced with another poster who provided an entire list of court cases. That was too much for your credibility, not his, for you immediately insinuated that the report’s writers might not be credible. Unfortunately, for your credibility, each case was clearly labeled with the name of the case hyperlinked for proof.
On the other hand, you continuously quote unverified reports from the Washington Post, moving your goalposts every time there is new material proving your source to be wrong. Nonetheless, you consider those sources credible.
There are too many lies, deception, and too much movement of goalposts in almost all your postings. You are not credible, and any response you provide has to be reevaluated entirely because your deception has no end.
You can’t deny my words to you whether they be insult or narrative based on what you say. Both are genuine. You are not.
Just because neither you nor Svelez can coherently counter any of the facts Allen S. Meyer (whom I assume is this particular “Anonymous – what is it with all of these “Anonymous”s?) makes him a “vile troll”. It just makes you deficient…
Perhaps you’re new here.
Anyone who wishes to can comment anonymously, and several people do.
S. Meyer — who used to post under the name Allan and who has also used other names, including Mark N and Kayla — posts about half of his comments anonymously.
What makes him a vile troll is the fact he often responds with nasty insults and also often lies about people.
Thank you, Allen S. As you already realize, ATS hasn’t been truthful on the blog. He has been spiteful. He is a trickster who deceives and lies, feeling that he can deny anything he previously said as an anonymous persona. I named him Anonymous the Stupid or ATS so that one could better track the discussions though most of the time, the ATS moniker isn’t used.
Thanks again.
I literally quoted your insults, Allan S. Meyer. There was no deception.
You are the spiteful one. You often post anonymously (you admit it here, where you explain why you often respond to Svelaz anonymously: https://jonathanturley.org/2022/03/11/amendments-by-acclamation-democrats-move-to-simply-declare-the-equal-rights-amendment-as-ratified/comment-page-2/#comment-2165530 ), and you are the one and only Anonymous the Stupid.
ATS: I freely admit that I have insulted you. I wish some of those people in the totalitarian Stalinist type world were insulted and pushed not to kill so many people who have meaning to me. That was not the case. Too many people were silent here and abroad.
Your rhetoric tells us what you are. There is no other person on this blog that matches your type. I believe you are the kind of person who enjoys deception and lying and, therefore, would be an asset to those doing those dirty deeds. You have no conscience. That is why Ashli babbitt was a “stupid woman”. She didn’t Conform. She was Different. She Needed to be killed. Still, when apologizing for that dumb remark, you emphasized ALL three qualities that led to her death.
I might sometimes be impolite, but I have a reason for my actions which are inherently based on my love of life and liberty. You base everything on lies and deceit, even your alias, anonymous.
“Why aren’t you celebrating with joy that Roe is going to be repealed? ”
Why should I celebrate? It hasn’t happened yet. My celebration would have little to do with the subject of abortion. The reason to celebrate is that a toxic Supreme Court decision not based on the Constitution will likely be removed.
You are too ignorant to recognize that this SC ruling doesn’t substantially change abortion. Abortion will continue to be available. In some places, it will make it slightly more difficult. In other places, we might see an expansion of heinous procedures where limbs are torn apart of a baby that could survive outside the womb.
That you act as if tearing apart a viable child limb by limb only demonstrates how sub-human you are.
S. Meyer,
“ Why should I celebrate? It hasn’t happened yet. My celebration would have little to do with the subject of abortion. The reason to celebrate is that a toxic Supreme Court decision not based on the Constitution will likely be removed.“
You are not celebrating the fact that the Trump judges did what they were out there to do? Republicans should be celebrating the fact that they are finally banning abortion for good. Once the Supreme Court issues its official ruling. The radical right will start to push for a National ban. They wont tolerate the fact that it will still be legal in some states. They won’t tolerate companies paying their employees to travel to get an abortion at a legal state.
You got what you wanted. A ban on abortions. You should be celebrating. The leak is just a small hiccup along a sure thing. Remember, republicans put those pro-life justices to repeal abortion rights. Contraceptives are next. Conservatives will get their wish on dictating how people should be behaving in the bedroom. Isn’t that wonderful it’s what you wanted and now you are hesitant? Common S. Meyer be brave, celebrate this historic change you have been fighting for.
“Republicans should be celebrating the fact that they are finally banning abortion for good.”
Dumb.
“The radical right will start to push for a National ban.”
And they will be opposed by many on the right. This is a state issue. Abortion will not be eliminated.
“You got what you wanted. A ban on abortions. ”
Are you too stupid to recognize that there is no ban on abortions? Abortion will be determined by state law.
“The leak is just a small hiccup”
More stupidity.
“Contraceptives are next. ”
And more stupidity. That will be up to the states unless the FDA decides to get in where it doesn’t belong.
“celebrate this historic change you have been fighting for.”
I fought for the Constitution. The states can make this type of a decision, or one can push for a Constitutional amendment.
SM
I suspect the court will simply henceforth be locked down tight as a drum, and since you can’t argue with the insane, that too will be Nazi-like to the left. The chaos they have sown over the past year is jaw-dropping. If we don’t get them out now it’ll be a heckuva lot harder later on. Sadly, I just expect them to be vicious and mendacious at this point, it no longer surprises me – I agree they need to gave the decency to stop calling themselves the Democratic Party. We have a communist party and a Constitutionalist one, and ne’er the twain shall meet.
I think he’s right. Once the radicals demonstrate that they can undermine the purity and finality of the court through political means, like leaking, the fundamental character of the institution will be changed.
The court knows who did it.
Now do they have the character to address the issue?
I learned early on in my carreer, dont lie to the boss. That included, making sure my direct supervisor, never got blindsided by events that happened, but my supervisor never heard about, until his boss asked about it. Never let the boss get called out by his boss.
So the Court knows who is responsible. My guess, a Clerk, using one cut out, for plausible deniability, and the Justice was fully informed.
Robert’s is responsible for his attempts at currating decisions. Getting unanimous decisions on small cases to give the appearance of apolitical, just the law, results.
I also hold Robert’s personally responsible for allowing on going spying on American Citizens by the abuse of 702 lookups. After four separate audits by the FISA court of 702 lookups, over 80% are illegal. Roberts is in charge of the FISA court, he has aided and abetted those crimes by refusing address the abuse.
I want to think the courts are there to protect me from the govt, but their actions prove otherwise.
Iowan2,
“ The court knows who did it.
Now do they have the character to address the issue?”.
The court is just as clueless as you and everyone else on who did it. You don’t know what the court is doing.
They are currently investigating and until they announce the result NOBODY knows anything.
You’re digging a rabbit hole of a conspiracy theory trying to make sense of not knowing. It’s better to wait and see what the investigation yields.
In the meantime you should be celebrating the fact that roe is going to be repealed and abortion will be banned in your state, if it’s one of them that is.
Aren’t you glad the Trump justices did what they were appointed for?
I’m willing to put my money on Justice Sotomayor as having enabled, if not directed, this leak She all be telegraphed she would do something like this with her “stench” screed directed at her fellow Justices.
And yes, if this opinion is truly the outcome, I’m delighted!
“. She all but…”
I also suspect Sotomayor.
The Democrat political organization is no more, they must change their name and stop hiding behind a party long gone. This group cares nothing for this nation other than what they can bleed from her. They are attacking the American people from inside as well as from outside the nation. Although they are not the majority they’ve manipulated the nation through violence. They think the average American is soft and will bend, he’d rather go along to get along. Hopefully the midterms will prove them wrong and they will be ousted. Americans must be vigilant these people have proven to be liars and are deceitful.
The amount of projection from your statement says it all about the Trump cult.
Honey, YOU are the one in the cult.
More likely, a Conservative clerk leaked the draft. This creates a divisive “wedge” issue for the upcoming elections. Not talking about jobs, fixing infrastructure or the economy but talking about a divisive issue that the two extreme factions will never agree on.
Democrats should follow Tim Ryan of Ohio as a role model. Ryan largely ignored the diversion and focused on winning swing-voters.
Bottom-Line: most voters want their leaders to unite and serve them, not divide us and divert us.
Well, that makes sense Ashcroft, unfortunately you can’t talk sense to Trump voters, if you could, there wouldn’t be Trump voters.
What did you hate most about Trump’s term: the peace or the prosperity?
Ain’t that special. There’s at least two America-haters (AKA Democrat socialists) back slapping each here this morning. Nice.
Like you, Tim Ryan is and will be a loser.
It seems to me this is most likely an attempt to change the result by instigating pressure on the five justices said to be in favour of overturning Roe/Casey, and Roberts as well. That pressure is now appearing. Fencing has gone up around the court, the justices are being protected at home, Alito cancelled attending a 5th Circuit conference yesterday, and other justices may cancel appearances today and tomorrow. This is likely due to intelligence indicating they are now at risk. I think an obvious next step for the progressive extremists is assassination. That would preserve Roe/Casey and, through Biden’s appointment power, change the balance on the court without the need for court packing legislation.
I don’t think this has much to do with the mid-terms or legislation. Waiting for the decision in June would more effectively enhance the progressive agenda on both of those items, given that it would be closer to the election. And it’s unlikely that legislation now would change the outcome in this case, since even if a law were to pass, which the filibuster would stop, the new justices could not be confirmed in time.
I would not be shocked to learn that Sotomayor signed off on this leak. She seems to be as politically motivated as she is ignorant, as evidenced by her disinformation in the vaccine case oral argument.
A broadcast on NPR yesterday lamented how the leak affected and will affect Primary voting.
What do you mean “now at risk”? Do you seriously believe that they weren’t at risk a month ago?
“I think an obvious next step for the progressive extremists is assassination.”
Extremists on both sides sometimes attempt to assassinate people. That is not just a progressive extremist problem. Conservative extremists were looking for Mike Pence on Jan. 6, chanting “hang Mike Pence.” I don’t doubt that some would have tried to kill him if they’d found him.
Daniel for most spot-on post on this discussion thread!
Whoever is responsible for this leak, and whoever effected the leak, should be removed from the court. This was – is – a blatant act of politicalization that has to be nipped in the bud. Fingers point toward Justic Sotomayor since she has made improper statements in the past and she is blatantly political. I never could figure out why she was qualified in the first place. The court has become political in the past few years – with justices like RBG refusing to attend a state of the union address given by a republican. But this is over the top.
“Sotomayor shocked many in calling upon students to campaign against abortion laws in anticipation of pending abortion cases before the court.”
Did that statement have anything to do with the criminality that occurred at the Supreme Court? Is Sotomayor responsible? Or is she only an activist who intellectually didn’t belong on the Supreme Court?
S. Meyer,
Leaking a draft from the Supreme Court is not a crime.
Nobody knows who is responsible and the rumors that it’s a staffer of Sotomayor are being falsely spread by right-leaning nut jobs losing their minds over what?
Shouldn’t you be celebrating this momentous occasion?
“Leaking a draft from the Supreme Court is not a crime.”
Have you suddenly become a lawyer? So far, your record of accuracy is among the poorest on this blog. Now you want others to consider your opinions as fact. I don’t know the answer, but if it isn’t a criminal act, it should be, and the sentence should be long. Of course, you and your friends find it a happy event when an illegal rapist enters the country to rape and kill American citizens. So much about your opinion on the law.
I already answered you about celebrating. Your statement demonstrates your ignorance about what others believe and what is at stake. You never cease in your abilities to make yourself look like a fool.
This lawyer named Turley said on Fox News that leaking probably wasn’t a crime. Believe him?
“that leaking probably wasn’t a crime. ”
Enigma, take note of the word ***probably***, and while leaking *might not* be a crime, other things might be.
“Federal penal law makes it a crime for anyone, including government employees, to embezzle government records or otherwise convert such records to the person’s own use. Whether the embezzlement at issue is treated as a serious felony carrying a potential prison sentence of up to ten years’, or a less serious crime with potential exposure of up to a year’s incarceration, depends on whether the value of the government property at issue exceeds $1,000.
Here, the theft patently exceeds that nominal amount. What has been stolen is not just a document but a vital process in which the entire country has a stake. Regardless of valuation, however, the Justice Department and the FBI plainly have jurisdiction to conduct a criminal investigation.” __ Andrew McCarthy
He and others have more to say. Turley was not doing a complete analysis.
S. Meyer,
You dolt, you stated this was a crime.
“ Did that statement have anything to do with the criminality that occurred at the Supreme Court?”
You said a crime occurred. Leaking is not a crime when it involves unclassified information.
“ I don’t know the answer, but if it isn’t a criminal act, it should be, and the sentence should be long.”
Of course you don’t. But that didn’t stop you from saying it was a criminal act. You’re just backtracking on an ignorant comment you made. I pointed out the fact that the leak was not criminal. There’s n law against leaking unclassified information.
You should be celebrating. Trump pulled thru with his justices. They did what they were appointed to do.
Aren’t you glad abortion is not a right anymore?
“You dolt, you stated this was a crime.”
That is right. That is my opinion. Criminality occurred and should be punished. Do we have adequate laws? I think so, but I don’t have the legal knowledge to provide the required facts.
“Leaking is not a crime when it involves unclassified information.”
It may or may not be, but that is not the only act under consideration. Your intellect is very thin if it exists.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/roe-v-wade-supremem-court-leak-investigated-crime-andrew-mccarthy
“But that didn’t stop you from saying it was a criminal act.”
Look up the word opinion in your dictionary. A six-year-old can do better than you.
The stench of politics has always tainted the Supreme Court, it was politics and promises that led to a court predisposed to make this decision. Politicians promised it would happen and now it is so. Throughout the history of the body, politics has reigned supreme (pun intended).
Turley says the “Court was island of confidentiality.” It is an island of secrecy, hiding behind closed doors when every other branch of government makes at least a weak attempt to operate in the sunshine. It’s time to televise their proceedings, maybe even press conferences to explain their decisions and respond to questions? They have no problem speaking to private groups of rich people.
+ 100 hear, hear.
The Justices have always represented their elite class interests, it’s just that it used to be more discrete. They could sit in their gilded chambers sipping tea from China cups while deciding the fate of the masses. Turley laments those by-gone days of refined pomp and circumstance, and the dissolution of the Court into an ugly, raw political brokerage firm. But that’s what it has always been, it’s just that the curtains have been pulled back for public viewing.
+100 agree
Enigmainblackcom for most asinine comment on the thread!
Allen, pick any year in history SCOTUS wasn’t political and I’ll refute it with facts.
+100
Throughout the history of the body, politics has reigned supreme (pun intended).
They are nominated by a politician and then confirmed by politicians. They have the same human nature. They have lived experiences and education that form their personal and judicial philosophy. Lifetime appointments do very little to assuage that nature. Their decisions will always be reviewed through a political lens because politics is how the majority of the population communicate. This draft majority opinion reflects a judicial philosophy that inconveniently aligns with the framer’s original federalism intent. I say inconveniently because progressives in both major parties have spent 100 years working to centralize power and if this ruling stands, will establish a precedent for other federal powers to be returned to the states and the people. Is that a political outcome? Sure it is. But it is a far more constitutional outcome than what the courts of have been in the modern era.
Roberts should gather the justices, clerks and others who had access to the draft in a room, lock the door, and ask them directly if they did it. Anyone who refuses to answer gets fired on the spot for insubordination. Let them sue.
Plus, if the person is such a brave hero, and so confident in her moral righteousness, then why won’t she WANT to take responsibility for her actions? Sorta like how Col. Jessup was so confident he was right to order the Code Red that he confessed to it in open court. If she won’t confess, then she’s a coward.
Besides, it’s not like the “hero” won’t be flooded with offers to work at left wing foundations, NGOs, academia, Planned Parenthood, Vox, MSNBC or others who hate America after her identity is revealed.
Watch as the Progressives try to pack the court by putting the non-biologist in before Justice Breyer leaves, so they can get the decision they want.
“One thing is now certain. The court will never be the same. There is a loss of innocence in all of this, a realization that the court is no longer immune from politics.”
*************************
Innocence is overrated. It makes you weak and vulnerable. The Court is not tainted. It’s smarter and will take steps to safeguard pre-opinions and hold leakers accountable using the panoply of technological safeguards we have to protect sensitive data. Maybe, just maybe, it will weed out ideologues that our law schools are hellbent to produce. That will take lots of courage but courage is the only thing that will do the job. You can’t be innocent and courageous. Courage takes understanding the heinous consequences of cowardice and that takes hard-won experience not being a babe in the woods.
will take steps to safeguard pre-opinions and hold leakers accountable using the panoply of technological safeguards we have to protect sensitive data.
This is an engineering solution to a human problem. Safe gaurds only work for honest people. Those with evil intent are only slowed by engineered safe guards.
Honestly, its going to be hard to change the culture of the political left, that exhibits every day, that right and wrong are situational, and for the greater good, evil must be utilized. “what ever it takes” is the rallying cry for the left. The left is forever yoked to the Kavanaugh fiasco. It is a real time example of how the left always loose on the battle field of ideas, and must use other means to advance and agenda they cannot speak of freely.
Now the left is yoked to this breach of confidentiality.
I have a hard time seeing a series of actions by the court ,that will restore them, in the eyes of the people.
This is not as dire as Turley makes it to be. Leaks were common before Chief Justice Roberts came on board. The 1973 Roe decision itself was leaked before it was made official. Turley didn’t mention that.
What I find funny is why republicans are so concerned about the leak. Why aren’t they celebrating the fact that they have finally gotten to their long sought goal to repeal Roe v Wade? Even republicans are not jumping for joy and making plans to continue making more restrictions.
The leak should be the least of their worries. The leak is pointless after knowing their cherished goal has become a reality. They chose those justices precisely because they wanted them to overturn Roe now that it’s happened they are not celebrating?
+100
Jeff, I agree totally. I just hope that those on ” your side” do not use this leak for another ” Summer of Love”. L.A. and Portland had some ” mostly peaceful” protests already. Attacking cops. Property destruction. I just don’t understand how some think that frustration gives them the right to destroy property or commit violent acts. And yes Jan. 6 is also an example of that.
And just for the record, I am not in favor of outlawing abortions. I do think that viability needs to be part of the equation. When that is, I am not sure. I am not a biologist.
Just for the record, I made the mistake of engaging with Dennis this week. although he didn’t reply to my last post, it is just as well. I have a new appreciation for our discourse.
Being secretive and opaque is not even close to the same thing as having integrity. And it is just as likely that a Republican leaked it then a Democrat.
It’s more likely that a rabid anti choice member like good ole Thomas leaked it. Opus Dei and all that jazz, to make sure no one comes to their senses. Turley, you have become a real right wing hack. You don’t mind that women are losing their rights only that a new distraction …the “leak” can be used to protect those who would demean and diminish women.
Just FYI, nobody with at least two live brain cells believes it is “more likely” that Thomas leaked it.
Holmes: Do you have to project your victimhood on the world? I don’t believe for a nano-second that you are a victim. The Constitution did not give you a right to kill and dismember unborn children.
Sammy — right, because we all know that the Republicans want the congress to kill the filibuster and pass a federal abortion rights law. Wow, your ignorance doesn’t even come close to your naivety.
If the subsequent drafts of the decision are less extreme then ti would make sense for a Republican could have leaked this one.
As much as I agree with Turley, his prediction:
“One thing is now certain. The court will never be the same. There is a loss of innocence in all of this, a realization that the court is no longer immune from politics.”
is a bit overblown. Let’s hope that this incident is a one-off, and the perpetrator will be fired, shamed, shunned, and disbarred to serve as a deterrent to others.