The Administration is reportedly moving forward with a grand jury investigation into the leak of the Dobbs decision on May 2, 2022. The timing is critical given the default statute of limitations of five years. The grand jury has issued subpoenas in an investigation led by U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro. It is welcome news for many of us who continue to worry about this leak’s impact on the institution and its unique culture.

Rumors have circulated that the Court had zeroed in on one or two likely culprits. Recently, Justice Samuel Alito said that he had “a pretty good idea” who was responsible, but that the evidence was not sufficient to move forward with any charges. In reviewing a pattern of leaks from the Court, Professor Josh Blackmun, a close Court watcher, went so far as to suggest that it is “likely that [Justice Elena] Kagan, or at least Kagan surrogates, are behind these leaks.”

There is reason to hope that this renewed investigation might succeed where the earlier investigation by the marshals failed. It does appear that they did an exhaustive job and notably had over a hundred possible suspects sign affidavits of their innocence under penalty of perjury. The FBI, however, is the world’s premier investigative organization, including forensic expertise. More importantly, the use of the grand jury can be a game changer, as targets are asked to answer questions under oath with growing risks of criminal charges for false or misleading statements.

Time tends to be the undoing of many criminals. If this were a clerk or employee (as opposed to a justice), they may have revealed their role to acquaintances. The FBI will often interview associates who, like the suspect, are subject to prosecution for lying to federal officers in such interviews. Indeed, if the FBI zeroes in on a target, that person could unilaterally reveal their identity to curry favor with the left in a blockbuster interview on MS NOW or CNN.

For the culprit, prosecutors could pursue a variety of charges, including Theft or Conversion of Government Property; False Statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001); Unauthorized Access/Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; and Obstruction of Justice.

The breach warrants the renewed investigation. In a city that floats on leaks, the court was an island of integrity. And more has been lost at the court than just confidentiality. There is a loss of confidence, even innocence, at an institution that once aspired to be something more than a source for the New York Times. This is a symptom of “an age of rage” and the sense of license to leak.

If there is a single individual who is the focus of this investigation, he or she will have been repeatedly interviewed and given false answers to federal investigators. That would create a classic and potentially compelling false-statements case if they can fill in the evidentiary gaps.

The malicious intent behind this leak was crushing for many people associated with the Court. It unleashed protests at the homes of the justices, including disgraceful protests at Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s home, where bloody dolls were left on her lawn despite her having young children in the house.

Four years after the leak, we are all still reeling from its impact and later leaks. This remains unfinished business for the Court and the country. Hopefully, the FBI will be able to complete what their colleagues in the Marshals Service started.

Jonathan Turley is the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”