• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chief Justice Roberts responds to leaked Supreme Court draft opinion

Credence

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
6,504
Reaction score
7,239
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent

Chief Justice Roberts responds to leaked Supreme Court draft opinion


The Supreme Court and Chief Justice John Roberts put out rare, written statements Tuesday to address the leak of a draft opinion showing the panel's conservative majority of justices is poised to overturn nearly 50 years of established abortion rights.

The statement on behalf of the court said, "Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case."

In a separate statement but released together, Roberts called the leak a "singular and egregious breach" of trust -- but defended the court's workforce and integrity, saying this will not undermine its operation.

"To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way," Roberts said.

"We at the Court are blessed to have a workforce – permanent employees and law clerks alike – intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court," he said. "This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here."

Roberts said he's directed the Marshal of the Court -- its chief operations and security officer -- to launch an investigation into the leak.

 

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
53,695
Reaction score
39,696
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Chief Justice Roberts responds to leaked Supreme Court draft opinion

The Supreme Court and Chief Justice John Roberts put out rare, written statements Tuesday to address the leak of a draft opinion showing the panel's conservative majority of justices is poised to overturn nearly 50 years of established abortion rights.

The statement on behalf of the court said, "Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case."

In a separate statement but released together, Roberts called the leak a "singular and egregious breach" of trust -- but defended the court's workforce and integrity, saying this will not undermine its operation.

"To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way," Roberts said.

"We at the Court are blessed to have a workforce – permanent employees and law clerks alike – intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court," he said. "This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here."

Roberts said he's directed the Marshal of the Court -- its chief operations and security officer -- to launch an investigation into the leak.


Inb4 the flood of people who are more outraged at the leak than the contents of the leak.
 

Hypothetical

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
12,252
Reaction score
3,815
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Inb4 the flood of people who are more outraged at the leak than the contents of the leak.
as they should be. the justices write drafts of different opinions all the time without that being the final decision. whoever leaked this info should be buried under the jail.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
63,200
Reaction score
45,189
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
as they should be. the justices write drafts of different opinions all the time without that being the final decision. whoever leaked this info should be buried under the jail.
What was the law that was broken?
 

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
53,695
Reaction score
39,696
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Inb4 the flood of people who are more outraged at the leak than the contents of the leak.

Eight minutes later:

as they should be. the justices write drafts of different opinions all the time without that being the final decision. whoever leaked this info should be buried under the jail.
 

BlueTex

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
41,836
Reaction score
32,246
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I don't agree with the direction that court seems to be leaning however I hope they catch the person or person who leaked this. This is a crime.

What specific statute was violated?
 

Cameron

Politically Correct
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
5,824
Reaction score
4,911
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Democrats gleeful, as their political stunt now takes shape for November
This opinion would have been published in late June/early July. Probably would have been more strategic to wait--this will now be old news by summer. "Gleeful" is hardly how I would characterize the Dem response thus far.
 

Hypothetical

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
12,252
Reaction score
3,815
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
What was the law that was broken?
removing an official government document thus defrauding the US government. the one they lump all this kind of shite under.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
63,200
Reaction score
45,189
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
removing an official government document thus defrauding the US government. the one they lump all this kind of shite under.
And the specific law(s) is ... ?
 

Overitall

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
29,678
Reaction score
17,412
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Pretty much authenticates the contents of the draft……
Yea, but you can't ignore this . . .

"Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case."

. . .,
can you?
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
60,049
Reaction score
51,524
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
"To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed."

The Court feels betrayed? The Court is the one apparently about to throw out several decades of jurisprudence out the window, a move that will get women killed. And worse this has nothing to do with some kind of realization that Roe was wrong all along. The only reason the Court is about to do this is because the GOP lied and cheated in confirmation processes so as to stack the court with far right judges groomed by the federalist society for this exact purpose.

If issued, this decision is a naked exercise of power, bought and paid for. As is sadly too often the case, the objective-sounding legal language is just a wall of bullshit that's supposed to occlude what's really going on.



And then I see that quote. The betayer's leader, complaining that he feels betrayed.
 

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
52,646
Reaction score
39,824
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
At best it "authenticates" that it represents Alito's position on the issue.


“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.”

What can those last four words be all about?

 

Luce

Weaponized Funk
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
27,811
Reaction score
18,317
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
as they should be. the justices write drafts of different opinions all the time without that being the final decision. whoever leaked this info should be buried under the jail.

Yes, but that's not how the world works now.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
60,049
Reaction score
51,524
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Pretty much authenticates the contents of the draft……

That tends to happen when the person doing the authenticating says "Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic"....
 

tres borrachos

HoHoHo
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 20, 2012
Messages
103,335
Reaction score
82,667
Location
Biden's 'Murica
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
as they should be. the justices write drafts of different opinions all the time without that being the final decision. whoever leaked this info should be buried under the jail.

What is the code of the law that was broken?
 

Cameron

Politically Correct
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
5,824
Reaction score
4,911
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
removing an official government document thus defrauding the US government. the one they lump all this kind of shite under.
Conservative jurisprudence in 2022: define civil rights as narrowly as possible but when it comes to prosecuting political opponents just "lump it all together" to get where you want.
 
Top Bottom