• 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

Hypothetical said:
removing an official government document thus defrauding the US government. the one they lump all this kind of shite under.
Click to expand...

Do you perhaps have citations to any appellate cases holding that the evidence was sufficient for conviction on a theory that a defendant "defrauded" the US government by "removing an official government document"?
 
Hypothetical said:
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.
Click to expand...
Actually, drafts are written by clerks. Justices just sign off on them, maybe just a bit of editing on their part.
 
Rexedgar said:
“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?

www.politico.com

Exclusive: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft circulated inside the court.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...

The can be "all about" what Alito's opinion is. We have no idea what the other justices think about that, specifically.
 
Well ladies, bend over. You are about to get totally ****ed by the USSC.
 
Credence said:
I don't necessarily think a "law" was broken, but it has to be a trust issue with anyone that works with Justices and are privy to information and that person should be fired. In any "business" this would be a major concern
Click to expand...
I would agree with that assessment in terms of further exacerbating the court's weakening and I suspect there were some employment contracts that were violated as well.
 
Lawyers and others who watch the court closely were shocked. Neal Katyal, who has argued dozens of cases before the court and as a young lawyer worked for Justice Stephen Breyer, compared the apparent leak to The New York Times' 1971 publication of the government’s secret history of the Vietnam War, known as the Pentagon Papers.

“This is the equivalent of the pentagon papers leak, but at the Supreme Court. I’m pretty sure there has never ever been such a leak. And certainly not in the years I’ve been following the Supreme Court," Katyal wrote on Twitter.

Part of the reason the Supreme Court has historically been so leak-proof is that only a handful of people have access to decisions before they're published. That includes the justices themselves and the small group of people who work for them. The justices' clerks, young lawyers who work for the justices for a year and who would be among those who could see a draft opinion, sign pledges of confidentiality.

www.wpbf.com

How rare is it for leaks to come out of the Supreme Court?

Part of the reason the Supreme Court has historically been so leak-proof is that only a handful of people have access to decisions before they're published.
www.wpbf.com www.wpbf.com
 
Superfly said:
Anybody think about how the one who leaked the draft might be a left-leaning justice, who wanted to insure that left-leaning voters came out en masse for the midterms?

Crazier things have happened.
Click to expand...
It could be from either side. But, it would be against their election interest to release it this early since it would have more effect closer to election and before the public has had time to come to terms with the ruling. I think if it were a liberal justice’s office it was to try to put pressure on a conservative justice to change their opinion or to agree to a compromise. Additionally, if it’s a conservative justice’s office it was because they are concerned Roberts may be getting close to flipping a conservative to a compromise and they want to try to force their hand to stay the course for their personal integrity. So it really comes down to who they think is the targeted swing and what their motivations would be.
 
Credence said:
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.

www.yahoo.com

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. "This was a singular and egregious breach...
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
When they catch this aid or whoever, they will never serve in a legal capacity again.
 
American said:
When they catch this aid or whoever, they will never serve in a legal capacity again.
Click to expand...
I agree. Probably fired and disbarred

I don't necessarily think a "law" was broken, but it has to be a trust issue with anyone that works with Justices and are privy to information. It is a huge breach of trust. In any "business" this would be a major concern where a person is working with confidential information
 
tacomancer said:
Yeah, I already looked at that, this law you cite is aimed at financial crimes.

If you look at the explanation here

1638. Embezzlement Of Government Property -- 18 U.S.C. § 641

www.justice.gov www.justice.gov

It doesn't match up to your assertion. It fails on points 1, 5, and 6.

@TurtleDude @Felis Leo

What is your take on whether this law applies?
Click to expand...
I'd say incorrect, it matches up fine with 1 and 5. the only question mark might be 6 and I believe that could be shown as well, in a way.

btw that website says that info may be outdated. do you have a newer link?
 
American said:
When they catch this aid or whoever, they will never serve in a legal capacity again.
Click to expand...
Why are you assuming it is not a justice who leaked this through a clerk or other employee?
 
Hypothetical said:
I'd say incorrect, it matches up fine with 1 and 5. the only question mark might be 6 and I believe that could be shown as well, in a way.

btw that website says that info may be outdated. do you have a newer link?
Click to expand...
I pinged some lawyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom