"[I]nvestigators have been unable to determine at this time, using a preponderance of the evidence standard, the identity of the person(s) who disclosed the draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. or how the draft opinion was provided to Politico."
That's the conclusion of the Marshal of the Supreme Court's investigation into the leak of draft opinion in Dobbs. Takeaways are:
- (1) it's "unlikely" outsiders hacked into the Court's network to get the draft;
- (2) the "whodunit" list was long (in addition to the judges, 82 "employees" had access to electronic or hard copies). All were interviewed. All denied leaking it;
- (3) the pandemic was blamed in part (according to the report, it led to more people working from home and more opportunities to remove sensitive information from the building);
- (4) Chief Justice Roberts asked Michael Chertoff to review and assess the Marshal's investigation. Chertoff endorsed its thoroughness and findings.
It doesn't appear that the Justices were interviewed. The report refers to "formal interviews of 97 personnel," with personnel defined as "temporary (law clerks) and permanent employees." But hard to believe they didn't interview the Justices.
Excerpting the full report below.
***UPDATE***: The Marshal did interview the Justices but did not ask that they sign affidavits (the other employees were asked to do so).
Dobbs Public Report January 19 2023 by John Byrne on Scribd
The report implies the leaker's name rhymes with Scalito.
ReplyDeleteLove that they didn’t ask the justices. Basically tells you everything you need to know….rules do not apply to us.
ReplyDelete10:47 spot on. Just like the recusal and similar rules which do not aply to them. And then they complain that people view them less favorably than they used to or as partisans. Given the uproar over the leak, which was indeed unfortunate and a crappy thing thing to do, you would think no stone would be left unturned. But not really.
ReplyDeleteLet's see. How about if there had been a discussion of re-arguing the case in the next term and how about if one of the three liberal justices wanted to stir the pot?
ReplyDelete? Huh? Estas loco y estupido.
ReplyDeleteGinny Thomas, the fat POS leaked the draft given to her by her moronic husband.
ReplyDeleteHey 10:28 that's a classy lady you're defaming with that vocabulary. There's at least zero other people more likely to be the culprit.
ReplyDeleteThe "investigator" is not really an investigator. If the court really wanted to know they would refer to the FBI. The FBI would find out in one week. However just like when the GOP also demanded a 1/6 investigation and backtracked once it was discovered many of their members were in on it. This was clearly leaked by a Justice or someone in their family or inner circle. It was leaked to lock down Kavanaugh who was wavering on over turning Roe.
ReplyDeleteOur country is so freaking corrupt that we report on and accept phony investigations.
Mr. Marcus I am coming to your district to try a case in the next few weeks and have a question. I identify as a cat and need to know whether I can just bring my litter box into the courthouse or need an order from the judge. Thanks in advance.
ReplyDeleteYou people are high if you think anyone other than a liberal clerk leaked it. The theories on Alito's motive to release his own draft are ridiculous.
ReplyDelete