Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Politico: SCOTUS Striking Down Roe v. Wade According to Leak
Do we trust Politico? Can we trust a leak from the most leak-free branch of the government? Here’s their breaking story:
The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.
The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
This is all very, very odd. The Supreme Court is famed for not leaking decisions before they are officially announced. In the past, there hasn’t been even a hint of which way a pending case may break. If the leak is accurate, it violates a sacrosanct tradition which will damage the court’s reputation and congenial relations between the justices and their staff.
The 98-page draft allegedly came “from a person familiar with the court’s proceedings in the Mississippi case along with other details supporting the authenticity of the document.”
One Alito quote reads: “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.” The leaker claims Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett agree with Alito.
If the leak is genuine and Roe v. Wade will be overturned, I think this helps the conservative side, at least slightly. It lets some hot air out of the balloon before the official announcement, lessening any possible midterm blowback. Far, far more importantly, it will save babies’ lives.
Published in General
Insurrection
Anyone see any khaki males in the crowd.?
I don’t think the Supreme Court could disbar the leaker, would just fire her.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the leaker is a him. At least genetically. That might be seen as even more heroic.
A blue state will not disbar the leaker.
I think those who say this was leaked by a lefty so that Dems get busy federalizing abortion law (by first abolishing the filibuster) and adding seats to the court before the midterms are correct. That would have been my guess.
There was no way the abortion absolutists were going to allow the Court to put a dent in our extreme (by European standards, no less!) abortion regime. And that’s all overturning Roe/Casey would do — put a dent in it.
She may have been “confirmed” by the senate, but she isn’t on the court and won’t be until Breyer leaves. Or maybe I should say “she,” since she admitted she is not a biologist and therefore cannot express an opinion about sex or gender.
I have wondered about this “tenth” justice thing. If people think she is already seated it’s not such a stretch to start “confirming” other justices. There could be a shadow Supreme Court to blow whatever way the liberal winds will shift. Yea, that’s the ticket.
If the draft opinion is legitimate (and I’m still not ready to accept that it is), then here’s my speculation–the vote to uphold the Alabama law was likely 6-3, to include Roberts. But, as for the reasoning to uphold the law, it became clear that there were 5 votes to obliterate Roe, with Roberts reasoning on other, more narrow, grounds. Thus, Roberts no longer was in the majority, and, if the story holds true, there will be a 5 vote majority, with 3 dissenters, and Roberts concurring in judgment. FWIW.
Because clerks don’t stay at the court permanently. The justices are far more likely to recognize that dropping this kind of … Baby Ruth in the punch bowl will have serious and long-term consequences that will hurt the liberals as much as the conservatives. There’s quite a lot of backroom negotiating and horse-trading that goes on, and that requires trust. That trust is gone now.
A twenty-something ideologue who’s spent their entire life dedicated to getting the biggest brass ring in the legal profession is far more likely to say damn the consequences.
She’s not been seated yet and won’t be until next term. I doubt she’s involved in anything in this term, and doesn’t have any clerks yet, since she’s not yet an Associate Justice.
If a young clerk leaked this, his/her/ they’s legal career may be over… But the gravy train in lefty politics and media will never end.
100% he will
He is not a Conservative. He is a creature of the Swamp
All you have to do is run in a deeply blue district.
If the leaker is found, he or she should be held up as the horrible person that he or she is.
They should never get a job in law. This is a high breach of every ethic.
A therapist doing this sort of thing to a client would never work again in the field.
This person should not only be disbarred, but I would hope this haunts him or her for the rest of his or her life. Never be given a job that requires any honesty of any sort. A lifetime ban without the opportunity of redemption as a sign to the next person even thinking of it.
I keep being told “Character matters”. Fine. It should here.
I doubt very much that is true. He has demonstrated that he reveres the Court too much to harm it in this way. He’s bent over backward — too much in my opinion – to keep collegiality.
I agree with those who say this leak will dramatically harm the Court going forward. When they are found out, and they will be, they must be severely punished, no matter who they are.
Good point
The leaker is part of the permanent bureaucracy – he/she will never pay a price
Yeah. Their fortune is made. The only question is whether they have any legal jeopardy.
Can the lawyers amongst us answer that question? Is there a law against what the leaker did?
me too.
Does it matter? None of the IC leakers were prosecuted and those leaks were felonies.
For those questioning whether the leaked draft is authentic, it is. The Chief Justice of the United States confirmed it.
https://apnews.com/article/kathy-hochul-biden-us-supreme-court-health-f6b899076faba20517b9ac1e82438c16?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter
“huge ramifications for this year’s elections”
That is what this is all about. They can now rig the election and blame it on this ruling.
Roberts leaked it so that the controversy was about the leak rather than about the decision.
Do you suppose that Taylor Lorenz is tirelessly digging to find the leaker and publish their identity?
So who is going to investigate the leak? The FBI is corrupt and not to be trusted. Is this a Federal Marshal kind of thing?
I just heard Dan Bongino say that Justice Roberts has confirmed the document is legitimate.
There will be no investigation.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/breaking-supreme-court-chief-justice-releases-statement-unprecedented-scotus-leak-confirms-authenticity-calls-investigation/
Does this need a sarcasm tag?