• 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!

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

Should Action be Taken Against the Perpetrator(s)?

  • Total voters
    42
HIP56948 said:
It's certainly underhanded but I have to say, if it didn't take them so damn long for the Supreme Court to do anything, maybe stuff like this wouldn't happen.
I mean, come on..sometimes it takes these 9 people 6-12 months to make up their mind about something. Just ridiculous.
I'd hate like hell to go shopping with them..We'd never get out of the damn store.
Click to expand...

They remind me of the Ents in LOTR: The Two Towers. Took 12 hours just to decide that they were going to have a discussion.
 
Cameron said:
Deciding something like abortion is hardly the same as going grocery shopping. In any event, if you think that's bad go to any trial-level court in the country. 1-2 years per decision is the norm and forget about going to trial that would take a decade.
Click to expand...
People make important decisions every day. Decisions that make a huge difference in their lives. It doesn't take them a better half of a year to decide Yes or No. I don't buy the "It's complicated"
Making the atomic bomb is complicated, thinking about abortion isn't.
 
I voted yes. The Court released a press statement on behalf of the court.

"Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court’s confidential deliberative work. 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,"

Chief Justice Roberts also issued a written statement along with the press release. Roberts, in his own statement announced that he has called upon the Marshal of the Court to investigate the situation and find the source who leaked the document to Politico

"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.
"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," he said. "Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court. 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."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/su...tice-marshal-investigate-leak-breach-of-trust


They will find out who leaked the document and if they happen to be a law clerk, will likely be disbarred. What bothers me is the timing of this leak on the eve of the early primaries ahead of the 2022 elections.
 
Mycroft said:
I voted yes, but I have to admit that I don't know exactly WHAT action can be taken. I don't know what laws are relevant.

Are there laws that make such an action criminal? I don't know, but if there are, then the leaker could be in for a world of hurt.

Were NDA's violated? Probably. But what are the legal consequences?

In any case, the fact of this leak happening is a threat to the long-established processes of the Supreme Court. The current Justices cannot allow this to pass without some effective response.
Click to expand...
If they're a law clerk or something like that, they'll probably be disbarred and never practice law again.
 
Overitall said:
Yea, but if abortion is still available then how will it impact a woman's health?
Click to expand...
the vast majority of abortions are not impelled by the health of the mother.
 
JMB802 said:
A Supreme Court decision that negatively impacts women's health is an actual crisis.

As opposed to FRW manufactured crises about gender boogeymen and fairy tales about kids being taught to be ashamed of their whiteness.
Click to expand...
Just remember, everything right wingers say is projection. They are the dumbest, most pathetic trolls ever
 
So I guess we will find out maybe someday who did the leaking. Robert has vowed to catch the person. You would think with the security in SCOTUS he or she should be easy to identify.

Documents should also always contain a watermark to identify who has what copy in the event of a leak. I guess SCTOUS isn't that advanced.
 
tres borrachos said:
So?
Click to expand...
it's not a major reason for abortions so claiming that this ruling -assuming the reports are accurate-will have major impact upon the health of women is nonsensical
 
Nothing will be done.

Consequences are so 20th century.
 
A year and a half or so in a DC jail with no bail. Then in time prosecute on whatever charge someone can contrive.
 
I voted yes.

Whoever leaked the draft should be fired and/or disbarred. Even if a law has not been broken; this was a major breach of trust.

This is coming from someone who is pro-choice
 
tres borrachos said:
Pregnancy is a medical condition.
Click to expand...
yep, and being pregnant or not pregnant usually isn't a deleterious condition. Sometimes it is. But most abortions are out of convenience
 
tres borrachos said:
So I guess we will find out maybe someday who did the leaking. Robert has vowed to catch the person. You would think with the security in SCOTUS he or she should be easy to identify.

Documents should also always contain a watermark to identify who has what copy in the event of a leak. I guess SCTOUS isn't that advanced.
Click to expand...

You can see that it was printed out, and then scanned - specifically to remove any metadata.
 
TurtleDude said:
the vast majority of abortions are not impelled by the health of the mother.
Click to expand...
I didn't think so, but apparently @JMB802 believes he has a compelling argument to make supporting his view.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
You can see that it was printed out, and then scanned - specifically to remove any metadata.
Click to expand...

Watermarks can't be removed when scanned, done properly. We have confidential company documents bearing watermarks for this exact reason and they can't be cleared off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom