[W: #41] Supreme Court leak represents unprecedented break in confidentiality. Should Action be Taken Against the Perpetrator(s)?

[tres borrachos]

Schumer is using the presumtion that Roe is about to be overturned based on the leak to attack the court itself. Republicans are calling for an investigation to find the leaker as that is a violation of the integrety of the court process. Something BTW which every SCOTUS justice no matter which party appointed them, or which part of the political spectrum they are on will agree with. I will bet anything that every liberal justice on the court is appalled by the actions of the leaker too.

Roe is about to be overturned because the evidence provided in the leak proves it so.

Republicans want to know who the leaker is because he/she just hurt the Republicans.

 

[The AntiDonald]

If they catch who leaked it, they'll never work as a lawyer again. There's no real question about that.

But it's almost certainly not a crime.

Is it possible the court leaked it intentionally to take a temperature on the electorate before they make their final decision?

If someone leaked it against the will of the court, they should be disbarred. But you have to admit it's kind of nice to see what they're thinking a few months in advance. Whatever it is, it sucks for women that grew up knowing they have this right to choose.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

WTF?

Are you not capable of reading in English?

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

Is it possible the court leaked it intentionally to take a temperature on the electorate before they make their final decision?

No, not really. The Court doesn't care about the electorate's temperature, and even if they did, they can read the same polls as everyone else.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Roe is about to be overturned because the evidence provided in the leak proves it so.

Republicans want to know who the leaker is because he/she just hurt the Republicans.

It greatly helps. You don’t win by losing, and in any event the decision would have to come down before the election anyway

 

[JMB802]

Are you not capable of reading in English?

Was that comment in English? I was hoping you would provide a decoder ring.

 

[Overitall]

Is it possible the court leaked it intentionally to take a temperature on the electorate before they make their final decision?

If someone leaked it against the will of the court, they should be disbarred. But you have to admit it's kind of nice to see what they're thinking a few months in advance. Whatever it is, it sucks for women that grew up knowing they have this right to choose.

The SC Justice is a lifetime appointment. There's a sound reason for that -- number one being not influenced by public opinion.

 

[longview]

Someone willing to take one for the team? Yea, I can see that. They are already calling this person a brave person. The loss of a legal career will be a small price to pay. This person will most likely never have to work another day in their life.

I am not sure they could profit from leaking confidential information.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I am not sure they could profit from leaking confidential information.

They will end up working for a leftist NGO or advocacy group with full salary for no actual work.

 

[Overitall]

I am not sure they could profit from leaking confidential information.

They could probably get a book deal written by a ghost writer -- for one thing. Imagine what this person knows about the inside of the Court.

 

[CharloTexan]

That's an interesting thought, but what a hell of a way to end a career. Maybe if he had a terminal illness he might consider going out in a blast, but then his survivors would have to deal with the shame.

Shame? How about "fallout" instead.

 

[Overitall]

Shame? How about "fallout" instead.

If the man is dying I don't think "fallout" would be a factor. Unless it's in the context of his children being economically punished for their dying father's action.

 

[longview]

They could probably get a book deal written by a ghost writer -- for one thing. Imagine what this person knows about the inside of the Court.

I think the book deal may be off the table, we do have laws about people profiting from criminal activity,
they may not apply, but it also depends how upset the justices are.

 

[Overitall]

I think the book deal may be off the table, we do have laws about people profiting from criminal activity,
they may not apply, but it also depends how upset the justices are.

Being criminally charged is iffy. This person is a lawyer who most likely was advised by other lawyers before doing this. It's comes off as a calculated risk worth taking for this person.

 

[longview]

Being criminally charged is iffy. This person is a lawyer who most likely was advised by other lawyers before doing this. It's comes off as a calculated risk worth taking for this person.

I am thinking of some petty crime, like improper handling of sensitive documents.
some small thing that would prevent a book deal in the future.

 

[CharloTexan]

If the man is dying I don't think "fallout" would be a factor. Unless it's in the context of his children being economically punished for their dying father's action.

Well shame doesn't enter the picture. That's my point. Call what come after the revealing whatever you will, but shame is not appropriate. Breyer, if he did the leaking, won't be hanging his head and neither would his family/friends/supporters.

 

[reflechissez]

When I heard Schumer rant just now, condemning the SC draft as Trump's court, I can't help but think perhaps, the leaker is a Democratic Party operative, an insider put in place to sway the Nov. elections.
Just speculating, and shooting out the possibilities.

Of course

 

[Overitall]

I am thinking of some petty crime, like improper handling of sensitive documents.
some small thing that would prevent a book deal in the future.

I would think that is a decision of the court -- attaching future earnings. Not every case automatically prevents a criminal from reaping money from writing about their crimes.

 

[cpwill]

Roe is about to be overturned because the evidence provided in the leak proves it so.

Republicans want to know who the leaker is because he/she just hurt the Republicans.

It's quite plausible that the leaker is a right-wing clerk. I don't know if exposing who it is would or wouldn't hurt the GOP, and, they probably don't, either (though it's certainly plausible both tribes instinctively suspect the other).

Probably the reason Republicans are more focused on the leaker is because they are less upset about the content of the leak itself, and because Conservatives tend to value the integrity of institutions more.

SCOTUSBlog put it well: