Instapundit writes: "IN THE LATEST YEAR-END REPORT ON THE JUDICIARY, Chief Justice John Roberts talks about judicial independence, but says not a word about the unprecedented leaked decision in Dobbs. Allegedly there is an investigation, but at this point it’s hard to believe, and that alone does little for the Court’s — or Roberts’ — credibility."
If they don't even refer to an ongoing investigation, I presume the investigation is over and the hope is that we'll forget that the leak ever occurred. We have an institution investigating itself over its own secrecy, and it's being secretive about its investigation and its secrecy.
Posts
59 comments:
What else is new??
what exactly is a court Supposed to do or say; when they find one of the judges is the leaker?
There are four times as many clerks as justices, all with access to the draft; most have significant others engaged in partisan/ideological DC work. Simple mathematics says that’s the source.
I'm sticking with the theory that a judge gave a copy to the WH, as a heads up, and that someone high up in the admin leaked it to the press. This will never be made public.
what exactly is a court Supposed to do or say; when they find one of the judges is the leaker?
If it is actually a Justice, then they must make a public announcement and allow Congress to decide on an impeachment. If any other official, they must be fired and an announcement of their firing made public.
If the culprit was on the Right, we'd already know their name. Since they're on the Left, they'll probably get away with it.
After all, Constitutional law professors seems to be fine with it. Historians will cll it the beginning of the end.
Perhaps the source of the leak is not known because there was no leak. My theory is that a government intelligence group monitors electronic communication between important nodes of the government (as well as the public). This group would then have picked up the draft when it was routed for review. They then routed the draft to the White House for handling. Any investigation into the supposed leak would be stymied because it would reveal "sources and methods," and that cannot be permitted.
If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on the draft being 'shared' by a Justice and then the recipient leaked it 'against' the wishes/understanding of the Justice. Plausible deniability with expressions of being personally horrified and professional embarrassed ensued.
"If it is actually a Justice, then they must make a public announcement and allow Congress to decide on an impeachment."
What's the high crime/misdemeanor?
What's the high crime/misdemeanor?
You really are determined to defend this leak aren't you?
Outrageous. Quite literally.
from investigation of leak after-action-report recommends
- restock supply closet for Depends
[footnote 1 - with advisory role for White House]
Everyone knows it was Sotomayor. Give her the same presumption of innocence that Michael Flynn and Donald Trump received.
Nixon’s Claim “When the President Does It, That Means It Is Not Illegal”
maybe Finally Vindicated by Current Supreme Court to include Justices and retinue
This is the new gaslight strategy. There is no need to lie about an inconvenient issue anymore. You just ignore it. Eventually a topic that leans to your favor will replace it and you can focus the public’s attention on that for awhile.
Without an aggressive press that can continually challenge establishment and governmental decisions and policies, democracies do not work.
For the last 2 generations schools have created an electorate that can’t think for itself and a press composed of careerists seeking favor with the powerful. For argument purposes, set aside whether you are pro or anti Trump. Within the last few years, the same group of people have given us;
1) a pandemic response that will have killed more than the pandemic
2) record high inflation and a return to stagflation
3) a real possibility of nuclear war
4) a normalization of life altering sexual surgery on teens that can be chosen on a whim
5) an odd inability to care about pedophilia as a crime
6) Ladies and gentlemen I present to you John Fetterman US Senator
And more. The people who brought us the last two years basically just got re-elected.
Happy New Year.
It will never be revealed because it was the stupid one, Sotomayor.
From Article III of the U.S. Constitution:
"The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour..."
Do you believe this leak was "good behavior"?
For those of us who don't believe that leaking confidential work documents from the Supreme Court is good behavior, what is the process for removing Justices for bad behavior if it isn't impeachment?
Is it your position that this unprecedented outrage is no big deal and now the new norm?
What high crime or misdemeanor did John Pickering commit?
I agree with Mr. Wibble, at least in part. A 'heads up' copy leaked from the WH would fit what we know so far, making it a highly probable route for the leak.
I think it is also reasonable to infer that the leak likely did *not* come from someone clerking for Kagan, Sotomayor, or Breyer. There would be little reason to so zealously protect the identity of that person. Leaking the draft also would have had little benefit to any of the five who originally supported the opinion as they already sufficient votes to issue it. While it's possible that one of the three who dissented thought a leak might derail the course of the ruling, I think they were smart enough to realize that they had no chance to get five votes against the Mississippi law, and that an opinion which left the law in place would effectively overturn Roe and especially Casey even if it didn't say it out loud.
The only person who stood to possibly benefit from the leak, and would require such a zealous guarding of the leaker's identity, is Roberts. He needed a firestorm of criticism to shake one of the five from a full overruling of Roe in order to write a 5-4 majority opinion that rhetorically upheld it, and he is in a position to ensure that the "investigation" being done by the Court's internal security staff goes nowhere.
I suspect it was one of the judges. It seems if it was a clerk then that person would already be revealed and thrown under the bus. Then, a statement would be given that this is a "one-off", and the majority of clerks would never do such a thing, as evidenced by the decades of opinions being kept confidential. But,they can't destroy a law clerk's career by accusing a clerk if it was actually one of the judges (I would think probably Sotomayor). So, the Court plans to be quiet in hopes that it will eventually be forgotten.
If you don't say anything and wait long enough, enough people will forget about it that you can get away with the act for generations.
As long as you can avoid the unpleasant questions, that is. Avoid the unpleasant people, and you can avoid the unpleasant questions. That's my interpretation.
Hence the importance of the Twitter revelations about manipulations by government entities. A look at the machinery of control and a gander at the "man behind the curtain" feeds our cynicism and takes away the credibility the controlling forces need to maintain their control.
Where that leads is a mystery that defines our time.
Chief Justice would know, you’ve got to be careful about precedents!
The book on Roberts is that he values the reputation of the court above all else. In that vein, he has pursued compromise over principle with the ironic result that he has done more than most to undermine the reputation of the court and will be remembered at best as a weak chief justice.
"What's the high crime/misdemeanor?"
Who says they need one? What is to prevent Congress from impeaching any justice (or president) for any reason whatsoever? What authority could stop a purely partisan impeachment? How many divisions does the Chief Justice have?
"What's the high crime/misdemeanor?"
Leaking privileged information.
Interference in a general election.
I hardly noticed when our Supreme Court turned into the Star Chamber, but there we are.
Between this and the lack of anyone or anything getting penalized in any manner for the entire Russia Collusion hoax, falsified FISA warrants, half inquiries into J6 with zero rebuttal and no minority representation, the refusal to investigate anything surrounding the implementation of the covid vaccines, the VAERS track record, the Wuhan lab, the investments into the development of the virus...well...one might be led to believe some things and some people are just not as we have been told they are.
Why...it's almost as if there was another government hidden in plain sight within our own regular government, filled with elected and unelected people, and those appointed for life, who follow no Constitution, but instead their own set of rules with their own agenda and goals.
It would make a terrific movie. But you'd have to have a character who played a bumbling old man running for President who was so out of his head that his team would never let him speak in public without a short script. So they would hide him from the press and public for a year going into the election. Then he'd somehow win the election, bumbling and hidden, with a record 83 million votes.
Nah. No one would belive that last part. It could have been a great movie idea if not for that last part.
Ann Althouse said...What's the high crime/misdemeanor?
If recent history is any guide, it’s whatever congress says it is.
I still don't know whose side the leak was supposed to help.
It may have only hardened the right, whereas the usual more subtle kind of leak might have allowed some wiggle room.
So was it a right-wing clerk?
Who's supposed to be angry about this, and at whom?
Yukon Cornelius, 5:51:
I really wish that weren't such a plausible explanation.
There was a time when I would have found the premise absurd: Why would some intel agency do such a thing? That was before headlines like, "Report: Brennan Apologizes to Senators for CIA Hacking."
And if you're right, sweeping it under the rug is exactly how it would be handled.
Ann: “… We have an institution investigating itself over its own secrecy, and it's being secretive about its investigation and its secrecy.”
Very nicely put. Is one of your New Year Resolutions to amp the “meta” setting on your postings?
Why assume the leak came from within. We live in a surveillance state where the IC has demonstrated its willingness and ability to meddle in and manipulate our political process for its own benefit, its own agenda and its own protection.
So was it a right-wing clerk?
Libertarian? Probably not. They would more likely favor the 1-2 compromise.
Conservatives centrist? Maybe. Pro-Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
The left-right nexus is leftist.
If you can't take a leak, get out of the bathroom.
"it's being secretive about its investigation and its secrecy"
This from the man who allegedly is concerned about the legitimacy of the court.
The constitutional standard for a Justice holding office is "good behavior". Leaking a document might also count as a "misdemeanor".
Either way, it's not very transparent, is it?
Prove you're not a robot? What do these three names have in common: Trump, Ye, Elon?
Rule 42: If protected, it's a lefty.
The Leaker is protected, The Leaker's a lefty. Beyond that, we have an all-you-can-swallow salad bar of possibilities. Does it matter?
I call the leftist corruption of our institutions, The Cabal, and The Cabal is covering for one of its own. Moving right along, we should try to separate the deluded from the beneficiaries of The Cabal in our approach. The deluded are, for example, those readers of the Post who are simply unaware of the Twitter revelations since the Post isn't covering that story. Consequently, they are also unaware that descriptions of social media, formerly known as "conspiracy theories" are, at this moment, being shown to be factual accounts of the situation. Instead, the deluded are wondering about China and Covid (since questions on that are now allowed by The Cabal) while we are becoming certain about government censorship of social media. The only way to convert the deluded is slowly and rationally by, for example, talking about China and Covid which they are allowed to think about right now. The Cabal, on the other hand when resisted will always think and act like Putin Goodheart when confronted with Ukrainian resistance.
Without an aggressive press that can continually challenge establishment and governmental decisions and policies, democracies do not work.
We have an aggressive press! Didn't you see how they aggressive they were about Trump, and burying Hunter's laptop? (Boy, there's no pleasing some people...!)
Unknown drips leak controversial draft opinion, and nothing follows--another norm destroyed.
I am going to quote John Hinderaker here on the consequences of the US Supreme Court agreeing with Justice White that Roe vs. Wade was an exercise of raw judicial power:
"What–to cite just one instance–happened to the 26-point swing among suburban women toward the GOP, which led Steve [Hayward] to dub this the 'Desperate Housewives Election?' They were desperate, all right–desperate to vote in favor of abortion and against Donald Trump."
This is why the leak has dropped off the agenda for everyone.
The GOP was totally unprepared to deal with the consequences of the Roe reversal and lost a generational opportunity to re-assert control of the House. They should have rushed to where a majority of the American population is, namely, abortion available up to fifteen weeks, reasonable restrictions thereafter. Instead, they sat around and said to each other, "Ain't we great?"
The Dems saw the opportunity to seize control of the situation with a plan to act in the moment by getting blue state legislatures to adopt unlimited abortion rights and start the ball rolling to amending state constitutions. In Michigan, the GOP lost control of the state senate for the first time in 40 years, and the state constitution was amended to enshrine very liberal abortion rights. In heavily-gerrymandered Illinois, the Dems ran ads nonstop about "protecting women's rights", acting as if those rights were under threat in any way.
Sheesh.
Everyone wants this to go away. The Dems won with Hobbs. The leak didn't hurt them. Following Hobbs, the GOP failed once again to engage with reality. The leak didn't get them to take control of the electoral implications.
Next up, courtesy of some loose dicta by Justice Thomas, the Dems run on protecting gay marriage, birth control, gay sex, and the abolition of anti-miscegenation laws, while the GOP does nothing.
Our government is just corrupt at every level.
Amadeus 48 said...
Everyone wants this to go away. The Dems won with Hobbs. The leak didn't hurt them. Following Hobbs, the GOP failed once again to engage with reality. The leak didn't get them to take control of the electoral implications.
Next up, courtesy of some loose dicta by Justice Thomas, the Dems run on protecting gay marriage, birth control, gay sex, and the abolition of anti-miscegenation laws, while the GOP does nothing.
It is almost as if the GOP is working with the democrats.
Crazy.
"It is almost as if the GOP is working with the democrats. Crazy."
Agreed. I think there are two genuine issues here:
1. The GOP has abandoned connections to its base supporters in favor of think-tank agendas. Let's look hard at the war in Ukraine. Let's look hard at what has happened to the US military since Obama was elected. The warriors are out. The social workers are in.
2. The GOP (like the Dems) raise money from problems with no intent of solving them. If the problem is solved, the political parties have a problem (how to scare up donations).
I'm curious why people think Sotomayor was the leaker. I'm not suggesting she wasn't, but wondering why you think she was.
If it was indeed a Justice who leaked it, I wonder what sanctions the Court itself could apply to that Justice. Future exclusion from conference? No access to other opinions until they are released? Are these even feasible?
It is almost as if the GOP is working with the democrats.
Either that or the 3/5 compromise, but is there an existential crisis?
Also, the 1-2 compromise (e.g. fetal-baby, people of pink, "our Posterity")... Some, Select [Black] Lives Matter (SS BLM).
It won't be disclosed because there's no reason to disclose it. Probably because:
1) Breyer (or his clerks) leaked it and he's gone.
OR
2) Kagan or Sotomayor leaked it, and Roberts doesn't want to cause hard feelings by making it public. No doubt a private chastisement from Roberts was felt to be good enough. Further, I can see Kavanaugh or Roberts playing "White Knight" if it was Kagan or Sotomayor. After all, they're "Only girls" and need to be protected.
Please note: The MSM knows who leaked it. Yet they have not disclosed it. Why? If it was a Conservative justice they would have spilt the beans in order to hurt them. Since they haven't we know it was one of the leftists, and a leftist leak makes sense for any number of other reasons.
It was Kagan. Possibly Sotomayor.
No clerk would risk it, even with assurances from her boss, the justice.
Blogger Temujin said...
Between this and the lack of anyone or anything getting penalized in any manner for the entire Russia Collusion hoax, falsified FISA warrants, half inquiries into J6 with zero rebuttal and no minority representation, the refusal to investigate anything surrounding the implementation of the covid vaccines, the VAERS track record, the Wuhan lab, the investments into the development of the virus...well...one might be led to believe some things and some people are just not as we have been told they are.
Conclusion?
Achilles said...
Our government is just corrupt at every level.
Yup, just like Brazil.
I agree with rcocean. Of course the MSM knows who the leaker is (or at least some version of how the leak happened). They are not even talking about it. Ipso facto--it wasn't someone who favored the decision.
As noted, I rate the possibility that the draft was leaked out of the White House as highly probably, maybe even the most likely scenario. If so, it probably originated with Sotomayor. Breyer or Kagen are savvy enough to have given just a summary as a heads-up. Only Sotomayor seems blatantly political enough to actually send a full copy.
I highly doubt any Justice leaked directly to the press.
Leaking the draft would have been a resume enhancer to any left-leaning clerk as a valiant attempt to save Roe. Doesn't mean the identify would have to be revealed but it cuts against claims that it is beheld back to protect the leaker. If the leak could have been traced back to one of the five original Justices in the majority the identity of leaker would have been disclosed. Remember the failed attempt to suggest that Alito himself leaked it.
An attempt to finger anyone outside the Court as the leaker runs into the problem of obviously being either a secondary source, or someone on the Court having to own up to sharing internal documents with outsiders even if they expected them to be held in strict confidence.
The only Justice who lands in the Venn diagram space of both potentially benefiting from the leak and needing to have the identity of the leaker undisclosed is Roberts.
The IC leaking a purloined copy is possible but seems unlikely. Their prevarications have almost always fallen in their wheelhouse, being based on claims of domestic disruption or foreign entanglement.
“It was Kagan. Possibly Sotomayor.”
Then it should be covered up, why impeach them and allow a younger healthier person to be their replacement?
As others have noted above, doesn't the silence mean that a justice was the leaker? If it were a Republican justice, the news would have leaked or, more likely, would have been reported.
Also, I said "Hobbs" above, when I should have said Dobbs. Too much crazy AZ governor's race in my head.
It’s unresolved stories all the way down…
The Supremes leak.
The Epstein jail suicide with security cameras turned off?
The Maricopa near perpetual election with one of the candidates counting votes?
The Norstream pipeline apparent sabotage?
The true origins of Covid
Biden said his dogs never bit no secret service agents
The Paul Pelosi story seems stranger the more we know about it.
Are we ever going to know who stayed at Epstein island?
How secret were the Mar-a-lago supper secret
And the so called mainstream media couldn’t be less interested.
(I’m leaving out unresolved stories, I’m sure.)
Maybe they don't know. What if there is a lot of evidence pointing, to A, but also some evidence pointing to B. So there is at least, shall we say, a shadow of a doubt. What should an ethical investigator do in those circumstances?
"We have an institution investigating itself over its own secrecy, and it's being secretive about its investigation and its secrecy."
Yeah, you'd think something would have leaked by now!
The Court got over The Brethren and has gotten over this.
Dear Ann, you don't need "high crimes and misdemeanors" any more. Trump was impeached twice for farcical reasons, none of which rose to that threshold.
Marcus B. THEOLDMAN
Blogger Big Mike said...
"Everyone knows it was Sotomayor."
Big Mike has no facts or evidence to support this moronic right wing nonsense so why does he wastes everyone's time with foolish speculation?
He's why I think its Breyer:
1) Any clerk who leaked did it with the approval of his justice
2) Any Justice knew leaking would damage his relations with the other justices. Not something you want to do when you might be working with them for another 10 years.
3) Breyer was leaving. He didn't care. He was never going to see these people again.
And..
Complete speculation. My impression is that Breyer had little liking or respect for Chief Justice Roberts. Not just due to ideology. Roberts was made chief justice at the age of 50, and what were judicial accomplishments? None really. And as shown by his writings Robert's is all over the map and will NOT go down as some great Judge or thinker. He's a male Grandma O'Connor.
So, here's Breyer. Not only a leftist, but someone who thinks of himself as super-smart, and he's 17 years older than Roberts and had been on Court for 10 years when Roberts came. I don't think Breyer ever respected the man.
Plus Breyer must have been a little bitter. All his SCOTUS years in the minority. Overshadowed by Ginsberg. Had Gore won in 2000, he would've been writing majority opinions. If Trump had lost, he'd be writing majority opinions. And he loses on Roe v. Wade on his way out.
Must have stuck in his craw.
Do nice things in secret.
(These will be happy surprises in the afterlife).
If you commit some awful sin, like accidentally killing a bunch of babies (oops) and you hope nobody notices that shit (too late), you might want to confess your shit and be open and honest.
Confession is bad for you in this world.
You lose face, prestige, money, and you might go to jail. Or lose your job. Christians encourage confession.
If you are a neophyte at Christianity, maybe in the first or second grade like me, you might start by confessing to God in secret and not say shit to police officers or newspapers. As you advance up the ladder of Christian education (there are many levels, I'm afraid, it might go up to graduate school), you might get a little more afraid of God and more willing to take shots in the chest in this world to protect yourself in the afterlife. Or not, Christians disagree. Jesus warns us about all of this. And it's quite common to find homeless people, addicts, and prisoners talking about Jesus Christ.
"Everyone knows it was Sotomayor."
I sent copies of my very serious book to everybody on the Supreme Court, including Sotomayor.
A huge number of people are oblivious to the infanticides. The media has been hiding the bodies for 40 years. Many Republicans have no idea what is going on.
In my view, when she said the stench, she was talking to Roberts and Kavanaugh and all the other Republicans about the danger of opening the door to a discussion of infanticides.
Many Republicans are secret pro-choice people (especially the ones in the White House, the Congress, and the Supreme Court).
Remember, Harry Blackmun was a Republican. So was O'Connor and Souter. There are a shitload of Republicans who are (secretly and dishonestly) pro-choice. All these upper class people want the poor (and the brown and the black) to abort their children.
These powerful and dishonest people are under great stress because Christians know the truth. And are trying to spread the news. Also we pray and ask God for help.
It takes decades but you don't want to oppose Christ. It's a horrible idea, in my opinion.
Ann Althouse said: "What's the high crime/misdemeanor?"
Whatever at least 216 members of the House and 67 members of the Senate say it is. There are no constraints on them; at least none that anyone outside the House and Senate can enforce. Impeachments are as much political as they are legal.
Post a Comment