Supreme Court Announces Results of Dobbs Leaker Investigation
By The Associated Press January 19, 2023 at 12:23pm
![]()
The Supreme Court said Thursday it has not determined who leaked a draft of the court’s opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, but that the investigation continues.
Eight months after Politico published its explosive leak detailing the draft of Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the court said its investigative team “has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Never before had an entire opinion made its way to the public before the court was ready to announce it.
Chief Justice John Roberts ordered an investigation the next day into what he termed an “egregious breach of trust.”
Investigators “conducted 126 formal interviews of 97 employees, all of whom denied disclosing the opinion” in sworn statements, the court said in a 23-page document posted on its website.
Some employees had to amend their written statements after they “admitted to telling their spouses about the draft opinion or vote count,” the report said.
The court said it could not rule out that the opinion was inadvertently disclosed, “for example, by being left in a public space either inside or outside the building.”
[i]I'm not sure who I'm more pissed at - The Supreme Court for allowing sensitive documents be seen prematurely
or the governments weak investigative skills.[/i]
The Supreme Court said Thursday it has not determined who leaked a draft of the court’s opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, but that the investigation continues.
Eight months after Politico published its explosive leak detailing the draft of Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the court said its investigative team “has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Never before had an entire opinion made its way to the public before the court was ready to announce it.
Chief Justice John Roberts ordered an investigation the next day into what he termed an “egregious breach of trust.”
Investigators “conducted 126 formal interviews of 97 employees, all of whom denied disclosing the opinion” in sworn statements, the court said in a 23-page document posted on its website.
Some employees had to amend their written statements after they “admitted to telling their spouses about the draft opinion or vote count,” the report said.
The court said it could not rule out that the opinion was inadvertently disclosed, “for example, by being left in a public space either inside or outside the building.”
[i]I'm not sure who I'm more pissed at - The Supreme Court for allowing sensitive documents be seen prematurely
or the governments weak investigative skills.[/i]
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
View 2 more replies »
akindheart · 61-69, F
Barefooter25 · 46-50, M
BizSuitStacy · M
TheOneyouwerewarnedabout · 41-45, M
trollslayer · 46-50, M
I call bullshit. My gut tells me they have a pretty good idea how the leak occurred or by whom, and there are reasons why they cannot pursue that lead or reveal that information.
black4white · 56-60, M
They never should have over turned this.... get from between HER legs....gggeeezzzzz
Slade · 56-60, M
@black4white ^IQ Killer^
black4white · 56-60, M
@Slade what do you mean?
This message was deleted by its author.
eli1601 · 70-79, M
@MarmeeMarch I'm still wondering who and how many get to classify something in the first place.
16,432 people following
Politics Personal Stories, Advice, and Support![]()
New Post Associated Forums Topic Members
Politics Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
