The recent leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion has sparked calls for an investigation into the matter. The leaked draft pertained to a decision that was yet to be released to the public. The leak prompted concerns about the integrity of the Court and the potential for insider trading based on non-public information. In response, the Supreme Court marshal’s office conducted an investigation, interviewing court employees and concluding that 82 individuals had access to the draft, including the nine justices.
However, the investigation primarily focused on personnel such as law clerks and other employees, rather than the justices themselves. This has raised questions about the thoroughness of the investigation and whether the justices were adequately scrutinized. Some have argued that the justices should have been required to sign sworn affidavits, as the other court workers were.
One justice in particular, Justice Samuel Alito, has come under scrutiny following a report that revealed he had dined with a former anti-abortion leader who learned of the outcome of a previous Alito-majority decision prior to its public release. The letter to lawmakers calling for an investigation highlighted this incident and questioned whether Alito’s contacts with anti-abortion activists were thoroughly examined.
The concern raised is that Supreme Court employees could face severe consequences if found to have misled the investigation, including termination of employment and damage to their future career prospects. On the other hand, the justices enjoy lifetime appointments and are virtually impossible to remove from office. This raises the question of why the justices were not subjected to the same legal vulnerability as the court staff.
Lawmakers have been urged to investigate the leak further, with some expressing their intention to do so. Representative Darrell Issa, a member of the committee overseeing the matter, has stated that the Supreme Court leak is not a closed case and that Congress must conduct a comprehensive investigation. However, it remains to be seen whether further action will be taken.
In addition to the leak, Representative Jim Jordan, who now holds a position of power in the House of Representatives, has expressed his desire to hold hearings on other matters, including the FBI, immigration, and President Joe Biden’s storage of classified documents at his private residence. This suggests that there may be competing priorities for congressional attention, making it uncertain whether a thorough investigation into the leak will take place.
Overall, the leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion has raised concerns about the integrity of the Court and the potential for insider trading. While an investigation was conducted, questions have been raised about the thoroughness of the investigation and whether the justices were adequately scrutinized. Calls for further investigation have been made, but it remains to be seen whether Congress will take action.
