Culprit of leak information about abortions case is not specified
2023.01.19 15:00
Culprit of leak information about abortions case is not specified
By Kristina Sobol
Budrigannews.com – The U.S. Supreme Court released a report on the May 2022 leak of a draft of its landmark ruling overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which had legalized abortion nationwide. However, the report did not identify the source of the revelation, which shocked the nation’s highest judicial body.
The draft ruling was leaked on May 2, and the news site Politico published it. This led to an internal conflict at the court and a political uproar, with supporters of abortion rights holding rallies outside the courthouse and elsewhere in the United States.
It was a first-of-its-kind breach of the nine-member court’s tradition of maintaining confidentiality during the behind-the-scenes decision-making process following oral arguments.
The report, which was written by Supreme Court marshal Gail Curley under Chief Justice John Roberts’s direction, did not specify the leak’s specific origin.
The report stated, “Over time, continued investigation and analysis may produce additional leads that could identify the disclosure’s source.” The court ought to take action to develop and implement improved policies governing the handling of court-sensitive information and select the most effective IT systems for security and collaboration regardless of who was the source of the disclosure.
The leak investigation was carried out at a time when the court was under more scrutiny and there were worries about the court losing its legitimacy, as polls showed that public confidence in the institution was falling.
A poll conducted by Reuters/Ipsos on January 13-15 found that only 43% of Americans have a favorable opinion of the court, down from 50% in May. The report also stated that investigators have examined the court’s computer devices, networks, printers, and available call and text logs but have found no forensic evidence indicating who disclosed the draft opinion.
According to the report, “it is not possible to determine the identity of any individual who may have disclosed the document or how the draft opinion ended up with Politico at this time, based on a preponderance of the evidence standard.”
The conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote the draft opinion, which was only slightly different from the June 24 final decision. The decision upheld a Mississippi law that prohibited abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy and ended the U.S. Constitution’s recognition of a woman’s right to an abortion.
Following the ruling, a number of Republican-led states swiftly enacted abortion bans.
Roberts announced an investigation into what he described as “a singular and egregious breach” of the Supreme Court’s trust “that is an affront to the court and the community of public servants who work here” the day after the leaked opinion was published.
Roberts in reporting the examination guarded the court’s labor force as “strongly faithful to the foundation and devoted to law and order,” adding that court workers have a custom of regarding the classification of the legal cycle. On May 5, Roberts described the leak as “absolutely appalling” and stated that “that’s just foolish” if the leaker believed it would affect the court’s work.
After the leak, protesters staged demonstrations outside the homes of some conservative justices. On June 8, a California man in his 26s with a handgun and a plan to kill Brett Kavanaugh was arrested near the home of the justice in Maryland. He was charged with attempted murder.
In September, liberal Justice Elena Kagan stated that the legitimacy of the court could be jeopardized if Americans came to perceive its members as attempting to impose their personal preferences on society. Alito cautioned against questioning the integrity of the court in October. On January 4, liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed her dissatisfaction with the court’s previous course of action. The conservative majority on the court is 6-3.
In November, the New York Times reported that a former leader of the anti-abortion movement claimed that Alito was informed in advance of the court’s decision in a significant 2014 case involving insurance coverage for women’s birth control.
Alito’s decision spared privately held businesses from a Democratic-backed federal rule that would have mandated that any health insurance they offered their employees would include coverage for contraceptives if the business had a religious objection.
The evangelical Christian minister Rob Schenck told the Times that he was told about the decision weeks before it was made, shortly after two of his conservative allies dined at Alito and his wife’s house. Any claim that Alito or his wife leaked the 2014 decision was “completely false,” according to a statement.
In a letter to two Democratic lawmakers who expressed concern about the situation, the court’s legal counsel wrote: There is nothing to indicate that Justice Alito’s actions were immoral.
