The legendary baseball player and manager Ted Williams once wrote a letter to the Angels outfielder Jay Johnstone on improving his hitting. Among his pieces of advice was that “with two strikes, you simply have to protect the plate.”
Williams’s advice on not striking out came to mind this week when another leak of confidential information rocked the Supreme Court. (The prior leak of the Dobbs decision went unsolved). For Chief Justice John Roberts, the message is clear: it is a time like this when you have to protect the plate.
Roberts, of course, is famous for his own baseball analogies. In his confirmation, he declared that “judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules. They apply them…Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire.”
Yet, justices do make rules not only in new precedent, but in the operation of the court system. Those rules are being broken.
In the same week as the new leak, Justice Sonia Sotomayor attacked her colleague Brett Kavanaugh as essentially an out-of-touch prig who had never even met an hourly wage worker. It was an unfair insult and a departure from the Court’s long-standing rules of civility. (Sotomayor later apologized).
Additionally, a forthcoming book by Mollie Hemingway on Justice Samuel Alito contains an embarrassing account of how Justice Elena Kagan allegedly screamed at Justice Stephen Breyer so loudly before the Dobbs opinion that the “wall was shaking.” (The book suggests that Kagan was upset with Breyer agreeing to spur along the dissents to get out the final opinions in light of rising threats against conservative colleagues after the leak).
For an institution that prides itself on its confidentiality and insularity, the Court is looking increasingly porous and partisan in these leaks. Worse yet, people are indeed coming to the Court “to see the umpires.”
The most recent leak was published by the New York Times, which was given internal memos from various Supreme Court justices on the use of what is known as the “shadow docket” to issue rulings without oral arguments.
Notably, the leaks occurred after a controversial speech by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson at Yale Law School in which she denounced the use of the shadow docket by her conservative colleagues to release decisions that were sometimes “utterly irrational.”
The memos reveal the concern of the justices that the Environmental Protection Agency was effectively gaming the system, imposing unlawful regulatory burdens on electric utilities despite a countervailing earlier ruling in Michigan v. EPA.
Chief Justice Roberts noted that the EPA was using the ongoing litigation to force utilities to spend billions of dollars to comply with the new regulations: “In other words the absence of stay allowed the agency to effectively implement an important program we held to be contrary to law.”
The controversy over the use of the shadow docket is immaterial to this story. The most immediate concern for Roberts should be that this is strike two: another leak from within the Court that was clearly designed to wound some of its members.
Unlike the Dobbs leak (which appeared to be an effort to influence the final opinion), this is a leak about a decade-old case. It had a purely malicious purpose to embarrass or disrupt the Court.
The question, again, is the identity of the culprit. There is no reason to assume that the same person was involved in both leaks. Rather, the leaks appear to reflect a deteriorating culture at the Court.
After the Dobbs leak, Chief Justice Roberts launched a fruitless investigation through the federal marshals to find the responsible person. The use of the marshals as the lead investigators (rather than the FBI) was criticized at the time. Roberts may have been sensitive to an executive-branch agency rooting around in the highest court of a sister branch.
The result was the worst possible outcome. The culprit succeeded in both leaking the opinion and evading any accountability.
The fact is that the Court’s culture and institutional identity have always been its greatest protection of confidentiality. In a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks, the Court was an island of integrity and civility. The “umpires” could call balls and strikes without playing the leak game.
That culture is fast becoming nothing but a relic in the wake of yet another major leak. For the future of the Court and the faith of the public, Roberts has to set his reservations aside and bring in the FBI to find the culprit. Most importantly, he has to guarantee total transparency in allowing the public to see the results wherever they may lead. In other words, with two strikes, Roberts needs to protect the plate.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution
This column ran on Fox.com
Ultimately a leadership issue, for sure. With respect to the leaks, I would start with “when did they start occurring?” and “were there any significant changes around that time, including new personnel?” Also, “are there any disgruntled employees?” I think the answers will quickly narrow down the suspects to one.
No one should be surprised about the leaks who followed the public appearances of three judges this week: KBJ complained about “shadow dockets”, SS criticized BK’s characterization of immigration enforcement practices, and CT argued that “Progressivism seeks to replace the basic premises of the Declaration of Independence, and hence our form of government,” Legal standing doen’ matter as long as President Trump and his administration is the target (KP hit piece), see WH ballroom, already approved by Art and Planning Commissions. Who sued against the Truman Balcony?
Trump replaced their leadership with Trump lackeys.
“The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, a panel made up of President Donald Trump’s appointees”
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/an-arts-panel-made-up-of-trump-appointees-approves-his-proposal-for-a-massive-white-house-ballroom
Just a short time has shown that “I am not a biologist” KBJ is not SCOTUS-worthy. It might be interesting to read the transcripts of the confirmation hearings for Kagan and Sotomayor. Not that spotting warning flags would help fix anything. Sometimes it’s just nice to know.
Lack of leadership is right. When the minions you lead act up or fail to do their job or do it poorly, then you as the leader are responsible. The Chief Justice needs to put the emphasis on CHIEF in his title and act accordingly.
I don’t care which side the justices are on, they need to be civil and quiet outside the court and toss papers and insults in chambers. They all need to step back and look at the relationship between Antonin Scalia and Ruth B. Ginsberg who crossed swords all the time but were closest of friends.
If the leaker is a non justice but is not found then the Chief Justice may need to clean out a section of employees at the court and also institute new rules and procedures. I suggest he engage the FBI and try to rebuild the court’s integrity.
I would also expect new rules on speeches outside of the court. One would expect the Justices would know this but apparently some re-emphasis on rules and decorum are in order. Publish them also.
The “Wise Latina” needs to pull in her horns and realize that many people go through severe struggles but may not broadcast their humbler origins or difficult times yet do their job every day and ascend to unimaginable heights. That’s kind of been the story of America for 250 years. She has no monopoly there.
Justice Jackson just shows again that she is no better at defining rationality than she is at defining a woman.
Excellent comment, GEB!
You are asking Roberts to grow a pair and/or a spine. Not happening. It has long been rumored that the dems have “something” on him and are keeping him on a short leash. That’s why the 3 worthless broads, Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson are there and free to publish this crap. Leaker? It’s one of them undoubtedly. That’s why Roberts is not calling in the FBI.
It’s not the Dems – It’s the Federalist Society that has control.
News Flash: “the Court’s culture and institutional identity” began its downward slide when DEI got injected like a virus. We literally have ignoramuses on the court based on ideology, skin pigment and genitalia. Faith in the judicial system is long gone.
Roberts is so concerned with the Court’s “image” that he damages it daily. He simply doesn’t have the courage to do what is necessary to administer the Constitution as it is written. He is so paralyzed by image protection that he will not even try to protect the plate by fouling off a pitch. His questioning during the birthright citizenship arguments is clear proof. To say that it’s a “new day but the same Constitution” ignores the fact that judicial precedent misread the text of the 14th Amendment. The author and sponsors of the 14th Amendment stated clearly that the amendment does not provide for birthright citizenship. Chief Justice Roberts remains one of GW Bush’s greatest mistakes. Blind respect for precedent ensures that a century-old mistake will be perpetuated.
Roberts is Kavanaugh, Sr. What a smarmy weasel.
SCOTUS was our last hope for survival of America beyond her 250th birthday. The bulwark is crumbling.
Wherever will America go? A vast and unpopulated wasteland?
There was also a recent leak that the Lib Justices are slow-walking their dissents so the Voting Rights Act case won’t be decided in time for (R) states to redistrict in 2026.
So begins the campaign to discredit the court and justify the expansion desired by the Progressives.
Hmmm, same strategy as Iran’s! What does THAT say?
What’s the rush to redistrict? Can’t win without making sure the other team cannot play? Typical conservative approach.
Another example of Turley telling everyone to look over here and ignore, in this case, the people behind the curtain. Turley says, “The controversy over the use of the shadow docket is immaterial to this story.” The reason for this story is to keep people from taking a hard look at the use of the shadow docket which the NYT leaks show how Roberts and the conservative majority are using it to make policy without having to explain it. We know more about the rationale behind the Iran War than the shadow docket decisions which are increasingly how SCOTUS operates. Whenever Turley tells you something isn’t important, it’s probably what he doesn’t want you to look at.
The Court is adjusting to the new form of “lawfare” that the left is utilizing in their attempt to change the country. Judges like Boasberg and Murphy in MA are trying to either run the nation or gum it up so that the sitting president can’t run it.
Of course the Justices are doing things differently, they have to after what your team is doing around the nation. Little district court judges trying to make national policy or stopping national policy is a prescription for disaster…but your side doesn’t care. Your side is the same side that wanted Trump out so badly in 2020 that you allowed states to shut down the entire economy to ruin him, you allowed race marches with 1000s and 1000s of people at the same time that you wouldn’t let people visit parents in hospitals or allowing them to go to their funerals. Your side arrested guys surf boarding alone in the ocean while John Lewis and George Floyd had massive funerals. You allowed cities to burn, businesses to be destroyed and lives ruined all to ruin Trump. Now you are trying to ruin him again through the courts and frankly the Supremes haven’t been aggressive enough to shut it the he** down.
“If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery]. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land. [Should freed blacks be made] politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this, and [even] if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not … We can not, then, make them equals.”
– Abraham Lincoln, Peoria, Illinois, October 16, 1854
Jefferson had similar views, he was worried about having the wolf by the ear and feared letting it go. What is your point, other than Lincoln’s views weren’t all that dissimilar than John C. Calhoun? One of my friends will argue with me that Lincoln’s views mellowed over time. I think it was only because his experiment at Cow Island failed, and he couldn’t get Black leaders to go along with his plan. Liberia became a colony anyway, but with Firestone as the colonizer.
It was pretty obvious to anyone who pays attention, that they were never gonna find the leaker. The marshall’s office isn’t even trained too investigate. And they barely did, only scratching the surface. Sad as it might seem, I don’t believe they even wanted to find the leaker. Besides, in DC you have to expect that if the leaker is perceived as anti-Trump, which is certainly the most likely scenario, no matter what the evidence, he or she will not be convicted.
Separation-of-powers prevented Roberts from bringing in the FBI to investigate the Dobbs leak? If that’s some high-minded principle, not just a defensive excuse, why does Roberts allow the lower courts to take on cases seeking political decisions that interfere with pending legislation in Congress?
The Senate was very close to a grand compromise to legalize DACAs in exchange for a merit-based legal immigration system in Feb. 2018, working under Pres. Trump’s 3/5/18 deadline for DACA law. Roberts sat by and did nothing as Dem activists went to the 9th District’s Judge Jon Tigar to get an injunction against the deadline. The purpose of the lawsuit was purely political — to halt Dems making any concessions on immigration policy. Tigar announced his decision, and negotiations in the Senate collapsed immediately as a result. DACAs are still in limbo.
Just 2 weeks ago, with a bill pending in the House that clears up all the ambiguity about Birthright Citizenship and clearly interprets the Citizenship Clause (HR 569), Roberts allowed the ACLU to challenge an Executive Order essentially mirroring the bill in Congress. The ACLU was intending a political lightning strike, using the Courts to strip from the political branches the power to revise Birthplace Citizenship eligibility.
And we’re supposed to believe Roberts respects separation of powers?
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2026/03/31/book_excerpt_-_the_invisible_coup_how_american_elites_and_foreign_powers_use_immigration_as_a_weapon_1173586.html
Chances that H.R. 569: Birthright Citizenship Act of 2025 will be enacted: 0%
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/hr569
I agree that HR 569 as currently drafted is Repub showboating (for fundraising only).
In order to work as a new Citizenship Policy, it would need several more measures added:
1) What will be the immigration status of a newborn not eligible for Birthplace Citizenship? The State Dept. should be prepared to issue a Neonate Visa, on which the baby’s nationality is derived from their parents’ nationality
2) Stateless babies. What about nations that don’t have jus sanguinis policies for newborns overseas? The State Dept. should be able to restrict Visa permissions to prevent stateless babies being born on US soil. For those that are, a foreign adoption program should be setup to find adoptive parents abroad, and if none can be found, US parents.
3) Effective date in the future giving States and Localities reasonable time to adapt systems and procedures
4) Fraud deterrence within State and Local birth recording processes; consequences for corrupt or lax registrars.
5) A clear statement that Birthplace Citizenships can never be retroactively revoked en masse based on a policy change. ( without this, legislation becomes a poison pill)
6) A parental Citizenship verification system to be implemented by DHS, and instant queries to be available to hospitals, birth centers, Counties, States and Tribal governments — anyone issuing Birth Registrations.
The current bill is merely performative…it’s is not a workable system design.
President Trump introduced “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” (EO 14,160), because there is no realistic chance that Congress will pass a similar bill [1]. Smelltest: What’s the reason for litigation and extensive coverage if there is common ground?
SCOTUS Justice Samuel Alito (critizised as “deranged”) and – for a long time – Mark Levin explained in details how to interpret “subject to the jurisdiction” of citizenship clause (“subject to USA’s judicial authority/law”), Peter Schweizer (“Invisible Coup”) offered the factual background about serious security concern. Does “stare decisis et non quieta movere”also applies if the circumstances (Illegal immigration, birth tourism [2]) have changed significantly?
[1] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/01/29/2025-02007/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship
[2] https://nypost.com/2026/01/29/opinion/how-china-supercharged-birth-tourism-and-scammed-american-citizenship-for-up-to-1-5-million-babies/
As the price of O-dumber care keeps climbing.
As I have stated a number of time, the problems within the Judicial Branch are self inflicted by the John Robert’s Court. I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the Dobbs “leak” was from a sitting Justice (I have my suspicions on which Justice). CJ Robert’s failure to rein in Rouge Judges in the Federal Judiciary and to sanction Justices on the SCOTUS for rude, unprofessional and even unethical behavior has opened the door to a Judicial Branch Coup of the United States. Until such time as a Chief Justice takes action against such Judicial Acts as we have seen in the last 2+ years, it will get worse!!!!
What specific action can he take? Seems to me the Presidents have failed in their duty to nominate judges who can be trusted to follow precedent, procedure and norms, and likewise the Senate has failed by voting to confirm the rogues.
“precedent, procedure and norms,”
Such concerns are of vastly lower priority than the essential mission, which is protecting and articulating the Constitution, as written.
The Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation work to present candidates for the US Federal courts – this isn’t a failure of the President, this is an intentional act to undermine the US Courts and the administration of the US government. The goal is to establish an oligarchy with the US government as figurehead.
It’s all symptomatic of the U.S. judiciary being on the road to becoming the judiciary of a banana republic. Packing the Supreme Court will complete that goal.
Those confidential informations that are passed on before the decisions have an agenda. From this alone, it can be inferred where the leak comes from. Only: Is there interest in finding something that one believes they already know anyway?
What is implied when you become an activist judge is that you are allowed to suspend any of the rules you choose. These include confidentiality and even the law itself. Judge Boasberg is the poster child for this. KBJ and SCOTUS as well, it seems.
Thinking a bit about Justice William O. Douglas who served in the years 1939–1975 and who was known as “the legislator in robes”, the activism component is not new. What I see now is relative weakness in the Chief Justice. Roberts seems to be trying the “engineer” his legacy by supporting a smorgasbord of differing opinions to balance the Court via an internal algorithm, incomprehensible to many. To me, this weakness is manifest in other Justices through opinions and leaks.
In our judicial system, leadership is every bit as important as in the other branches of government, perhaps more so.
“Justice William O. Douglas who served in the years 1939–1975 and who was known as “the legislator in robes”,”
Douglas, himself, hardly marks the beginning of that behavior; I would give you amusing author but rotten Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes as a example.
Readily apparent that the three female social engineers on the court are behaving like the political activists that they are. Fragile over educated pro death feminist lunatics are just one of the demographics destroying our country.
Blame Republicans. They are the ones that championed the 19th Amendment after the Civil War. Democrats had the good sense to oppose it for around 50 years.
Look at a chart of the national debt over time. It goes parabolic after women got the right to vote. That is no coincidence. That’s when the shift to the bureaucratic welfare state and collectivism began, as emotions rather than logic and reason began driving policy.
BTW, I don’t blame women. They are being true to their nature. The blame belongs on the politicians who pandered to their emotionalism. And now the culture has feminized men, with radical feminists running around referring to masculinity as “toxic” and how the politicians have rigged the system to privilege women and penalize men.
“Look at a chart of the national debt over time. It goes parabolic after women got the right to vote.”
Besides your revolting sexism, and your obvious post hoc fallacy — your history of the debt post-1920 is a fiction of your fevered imagination.
The national debt in fact dropped dramatically in the 1920’s (right after the 19th Amendment passed), then rose in the 30’s, then dropped radically post-WWII.
I misremembered Fig. 2 in the attached paper as depicting federal government debt. In fact, it is the expansion in the size and scope of state government that correlates with women getting the right to vote.
https://download.ssrn.com/20/11/04/ssrn_id3700779_code16317.pdf?response-content-disposition=inline&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEEEaCXVzLWVhc3QtMSJGMEQCICePMcfsu1%2Bf6llLIRJc%2B8tmTL0WlZ%2BqgD4zAxu%2FScbTAiA%2F9ynb4lYpfv0MQ5dXrETZvbYrZQEJm6H1MgNgHSkhqyq9BQgKEAQaDDMwODQ3NTMwMTI1NyIMJKf8tBk35Tc7iRObKpoFrYR4SVvp1cIkRgL0CCRwL0zOwomJZMYa4tkWCVEyOfC1iuXmasglnrK7TkXZl7%2FNU4DAXqqvKKVFb7liO5pxsvZne4bwguwSawgYYyThdxX78rHR0lRzcUCJ40OQ6hatA%2BUM5fT4xMMozkzermXFMz8ZPphQhQiMIyHdhOY4ZCRv3aMvCUs1aWEwTwu7WpSuG0R7JtQ9D2e5Fx9Rl19TjH3h1yD9U0ouwid1g%2BXGGPmuAHIYhrMrj2%2Ba3cbFBQ2fhCmMSJPWEuzSW6qJ%2Bc%2Ba6rgmgNRuCRwQFleqCAdfTU%2FVXrGMJqIAE2JVVS8XEzzrELU4VzfqXRVMgThFuJqmh6WcuIZXNYoG%2FYyTfUXb7t6yeGWMrm1PJ9PF1qPFnr1VcPmWawtdwMYo0lUjmnXx8qJqpGrR1g95fR9NcbFXRKdUIa1HIGqW30pKOA8WaEIpgTzZ30NGGEFNOwFal7DMRBoJ0TRbVIeD%2B7uYFGcmq5kC%2FVs3vG3JJE%2B0qTTx3hjhTMh3rch%2FwqREnPgboerYAmKwLMX9oYHD%2F4Q3JV5gMyRij2L9ar5oXZTzkEGTtFDX7XRwtOV7fvNMSYcK7jKtPrNzuh6%2BkMqpQWtfRBDKPui58mwE55FeSBwixSp7dOCL2nxrDGuUze6PCoNZ7vAP2J1TR%2BBGj6J7lFK%2BYxJorZdtf8O%2F03X26gl73lTjaVZtlazMKROb4X7Z2vXWBdIgF40RPfCMggtTMigNQg6lPXqgFK6vgLL5VlYCZ%2BVjJvj9ohXn41n%2BaymH7uFh2JjBqvPeG0PgBdI%2FpsZBJQpczFKg3dBzo3l3obenRcB5iY6muLZqA0DIm3ANrppPlfQRHJaO6XETFrmGQSEvDM5aiVOOn3WKJ4iy1f4bMOmGlM8GOrIBLqPlc7Ngh83adeTi8EhnvZI3Xh4o%2FHmHMNpqGpCzNRePY6bLBAX12HXqAUk2Pm90nxOZeSHJx3C2SwbmhYZuA8KEClXSZk7hujUwztMXLOYYV17vPC6fvemvIw%2FmWJ%2FJ69vzfs1ZzAUEYGXdgqZC9X%2BcunAEVcKFpG2HchqD%2B0kHtXbE0AJtB8d2XvO%2BwSRVbPXjDMFDVC%2B%2FcN2qbQu8LfFvMGKoZmt04c4zf4559RVvmg%3D%3D&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20260419T173208Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz-Credential=ASIAUPUUPRWEYRTFGHWZ%2F20260419%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=eaa72ae3cfde31ba87c7de69e9a8e3a66c84ff2b96818ebbc04f5ba3ae9a36d3&abstractId=160530
Try learning how to use web links efficiently. Sheesh!
Leftist are unhinged psychopaths. There is no denying it, their rants and willingness to break the law proves that. Leftists judges and Justices are just as unhinged and psycho.
There at least two more leaks:
1. On 6/24/24, SCOTUS inadvertently posted a document to its website that appeared to be an opinion for Moyle v. United States.
2. In Mid 9/24, NYT used confidential memos to smear Chief Justice Roberts.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/supreme-court/3155397/chief-justice-john-roberts-targeted-supreme-court-leak/
KBJ assumed office June 30, 2022. No leaks before that, only after. KBJ’s also publicly been upset with Supreme Court procedures and decisions that have been the subject of leaks. Hmm.
“KBJ assumed office June 30, 2022. No leaks before that, only after.”
Politico published the leak of the Dobbs decision on May 2, 2022. On my calendar, at least, May precedes June.
SCOTUS statement of leak investigation:
https://thehill.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/01/Dobbs-Public-Report-January-19-2023.pdf
Most Americans know it is the Clerk Corp that is leaking with or with out Justice blessings. The righteous pointy-headed ambitious little dirtbag ambulance chasers see themselves as Social Justice Warriors that provide convenient politically biased transparency as their high IQ demands! These half-baked illuminati don’t care about precedent or moral code when they alone deem disclosure is required to WIN! Welcome to the future – and we wonder why Gen Z sucks at everything but gaming and trying to get money for nothing?
Other than your first sentence, I agree completely. I suspect that “most Americans” believe that the Justices are busy into the wee hours, pouring over law books and making sure that their blue-book citations are correct. I would bet that very few people realize that their clerks are the one’s actually writing the opinions.
Roberts struck out years ago when he changed his vote near the end and ruled Obamacare was a tax law even when Obama himself (plus Pelosi and Harry) said it wasn’t. Worst Chief ever
That’s a ridiculous argument and always was. Who the hell cares what 0bama, Pelosi, and Dingy Harry said? All three were notorious liars; are you seriously saying the court should have believed them? The whole point of Roberts’s opinion in NFIB v Sibelius is that the court doesn’t care what politicians say they’ve done, it looks only at what they have done. A law means what it says, not what its propagandists claim. He showed that that’s been the court’s position for decades. And he showed how by every criterion used to distinguish a penalty from a tax, the 0bamacare levy fit the description of a tax and not that of a penalty. That Democrat politicians swore to the public that it was not a tax was irrelevant; they lied.
Sorry. Earl Warren still holds the distinction of being the worst chief justice ever.
CJ Taney would like a word