Courts, Criminal law, Supreme Court

The Justice Department Moves Forward with Grand Jury Investigation into Dobbs Leak

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.”

128 thoughts on “The Justice Department Moves Forward with Grand Jury Investigation into Dobbs Leak”

  2. FINALLY! There is so many screwy people out there that believe they are charged with doing anything illegal. It amazes me!! I believe that the only thing that our country can do is to PROSECUTE!

    Reply

  3. I fail to see a valid reason for the Executive Branch to be carrying out an investigation of the Supreme Court in pursuit of criminal penalties.

    Reply

    2. I thought Mr. Turley explained the reasons quite well. Maybe the reason you don’t see it is you are an ignorant, partisan, America hating, woke liberal that will forgive any liberal misconduct or crimes while seeing fake conspiracies and crimes everywhere if it is a conservative?

      I would recommend some self examination, but I sincerely believe you, like all liberals you are incapable of that.

      Reply

      1. You will pardon me for observing that you have failed to give me a valid reason. Try again, please, and don’t forget to mention the Separation of Powers.

        Reply

  4. Alito said according to The Hill, the leak solidified the votes early. I haven’t read it but does it do that? Was the vote a basic 5-4, Roberts voting with the liberals? If that’s the case the conservatives leaked it to solidify the 5.

    Reply

      1. Try using a dictionary.

        likely /līk′lē/
        adjective

        Possessing or displaying the qualities or characteristics that make something probable.
"They are likely to become angry with him."
Within the realm of credibility; plausible.
"not a very likely excuse."
Apparently appropriate or suitable.
"There were several likely candidates for the job."

        The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition

        Reply

        1. Try using logic.

          If you claim that something is likely or probable, you need to provide some facts and evidence. Otherwise your claim is just noise.

          Reply

        2. A fact is a statement that is true and can be verified. It refers to an actual occurrence or situation that exists in reality. Facts are distinguished from opinions, beliefs, or interpretations, as they are based on objective evidence.Characteristics of Facts

          • Truthful: Facts represent what is actually the case.
          • Verifiable: They can be confirmed through observation or evidence.
          • Objective: Facts are not influenced by personal feelings or opinions.
          Reply

    1. So what you seem to be saying is that somehow the Democrats rigged the election in a state where the GOP controls all the levers of power, Governor, Lt. Gov., Attorney General, and every other state-wide executive position. They also had complete control of both houses of the state legislature, and complete control of the state judiciary with every single seat on the state Supreme Court, and the Court of Criminal Appeals.

      The GOP had total control over the election and voter registration.

      How do you think they managed to pull off a rigged election????

      Reply

  7. Turley Writes:

    The FBI, however, is the world’s premier investigative organization, including forensic expertise.

    …………………………………

    The FBI ‘was’ the world’s premier investigative organization. But under Kash Patel, the FBI has cleared out many of its best people because their ‘loyalty’ to Trump was in doubt.

    Reply

      1. The only people he cleared out were deep staters, many criminals involved in the Russia collusion hoax. the Arctic Frost hoax and the Hunter Biden laptop is a Russian hoax hoax.

        Democrats = criminal hoaxes

        Reply

  8. Turley Writes:

    There is reason to hope that this renewed investigation might succeed where the earlier investigation by the marshals failed.

    ……………………………

    Turley should be careful of what he wishes for.  There is a theory that Alito leaked the opinion because he was afraid that Roberts and Kavanaugh might water Dobbs down.

    Reply

    2. I would support Trump if he launches nuclear strikes against the DNC, Democratic member of congress, Democratic governors and all paid liberal protesters.

      Reply

  10. While John Say is correct to at least consider the concept of theft involving intellectual property or under copyright law, I do believe that draft judicial opinions or draft legislative measures may not be protected when created as part of official duties under the “government edicts doctrine.” Likewise, internal “work product” exemptions would not apply.

    However, as an ex-fed employee, I DO know that there is a judicial deliberative process privilege that protects in-chambers deliberative discussions and drafts. That privilege is waived when disclosed to external persons or contacts.

    It never came up during my years with the feds and I do not know what compulsory or punitive measures might attach thereto.

    Reply

    2. The Federal Reserve System has a unique structure; the Board of Governors is a federal agency, while the 12 Federal Reserve Banks operate like private corporations. Employees of the Board of Governors are considered federal employees, but employees of the Federal Reserve Banks are not.

      So where you a federal employee? We all know the Fed is corrupt and has been for decades. Maybe we should have higher expectations, rules and laws for the judicial branch’s highest court? I certainly hope we HOLD them to a highee standard

      Reply

  11. A clear and carefully reasoned breakdown — the procedural detail is what makes this worth reading. Thanks for taking the time to lay it out so plainly.

    Reply

  12. Why did the American Founders consider only European males, aged 21, and property owners appropriate for suffrage?

    Why did the American Founders consider that only Americans would be admitted to become citizens?

    Reply

    1. @Anonyninny

      Why are you such an insufferable troll everyday, seemingly with limitless time when the rest of us have to work everyday? Why do you haunt a blog, for years, that clearly you find nothing but fodder for disparagement? You think the others are the problem? Are you on meds? should I check them for you, since your nurse or caretaker seems to have gone AWOL, likely because they can’t stand you?

      The only answer is that your are either paid or insane. Take your pick. Might be both. Nobody cares, tool.

      Reply

      1. James

        So, you have to work every day. Really????

        What kind of “work” do you do that allows you to spend all day, every day “haunting” this blog with your inane comments?

        Reply

      3. Were the American Founders trolls in the country they fought for and established?

        Shall we also ignore the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

        Do the Founders haunt their United States of America?

        Do you even know which country you’re in?

        Reply

    2. Actually, the U.S. Constitution didn’t set any of those voting qualifications. Under Article I, Section 2, the Framers left voter qualifications entirely up to individual states.

      Early voting laws varied widely across the country. New Jersey’s original 1776 state constitution allowed property-owning women and free Black residents to vote until the state legislature changed its laws in 1807.

      The restricted voter standards you mention were set by the states, not federal constitutional mandates.

      Reply

      1. And the states imposed those restrictions for the most part.

        Do please comment on the Greeks who created democracy with a restricted vote in 508 B.C.

        Do you even know what democracy was created to be?

        Do you imagine the Greeks intended the “dictatorship of the majority,” the “dictatorship of the poor,” and the “dictatorship of the proletariat”?

        Karl Marx did.

        Reply

  13. Any Americans out there notice “Reconquista” was just completed and the Southwest was returned to Mexico?

    Reply

Leave a Reply