Are investigators closing in?
A week after the Supreme Court’s draft opinion that revealed the majority of Justices agreed with overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked, opinions about who and why the documents were leaked are still swirling.
In an effort to narrow the list of suspects, speculators have turned their attention to questions surrounding who would benefit most from the leak that pierced the Supreme Court’s veil of secrecy.
When Politico released the document, the publication didn’t reveal information about how it obtained the draft ruling that revealed four conservative Justices were siding with Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion to overturn the fifty-year-old precedent.
Although the draft opinion isn’t final until the court issues a ruling, the polarizing view expressed in the opinion has instigated a wave of pro-choice demonstrations and has led many Democratic lawmakers to call for the abolishment of the filibuster and court-packing to ensure Roe v. Wade is codified in legislation.
These actions have lent credence to the idea that a pro-abortion clerk to one of the liberal justices leaked the draft opinion to galvanize the public.
However, an equally confronting theory among some court watchers is that an anti-abortion figure with access to the draft released it to dissuade conservative justices from making a trade-off or diluting the language in the opinion before the Supreme Court issues its ruling.
According to Kel McClanahan, an adjunct law professor at George Washington University and an attorney specializing in whistleblower law, the only way for those working at the Supreme Court to weather the storm is to lawyer up.
“If you work for the Supreme Court, talk to a lawyer whether you’re a whistleblower or not,” McClanahan argued, adding, “That’s the person who’s going to be able to help you navigate the storm that you’re about to weather.”
