‘This Danger Will Only Grow’: Jonathan Turley Takes Supreme Court Apart Over Failure To Find Leaker

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley laid into the Supreme Court on Thursday after reports revealed that they had been unable to determine who leaked an early draft of their decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

The court released the following report Thursday afternoon — and despite calling the leak a “misguided attempt at protest” And a “grave assault on the judicial process,” They stated that investigators had examined evidence and interviewed everyone who might have seen or had access to a draft of the draft. However, they still did not come up with any new information. “The team has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence.”

Turley expressed his disappointment by saying that he did not like the draft and that he felt that failing to punish those who had leaked it would only lead to more leaks.

“The Supreme Court’s report indicates that they cannot isolate the culprit among the over 80 possible suspects for the Dobbs leak. It is an admission that is almost as chilling as the leak itself,” Turley started.

…It will likely revive concerns over whether the FBI should have been asked to take the lead on the investigation. The Court is only a few blocks from the world’s leading forensic investigatory body…

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) January 19, 2023

“It will likely revive concerns over whether the FBI should have been asked to take the lead on the investigation. The Court is only a few blocks from the world’s leading forensic investigatory body,” He concluded.

Turley stated that anyone might feel compelled or obligated to leak future decisions would not have to fear any repercussions. “Thus far, the culprit succeeded in not just leaking the opinion but evading detection.”

…The proposed changes in security are unlikely to meaningfully reduce the danger of such leaks. Because of the Court’s nature, drafts and memos must be freely circulated. That is why we hope to achieve through deterrence what was not achieved through ethics…

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) January 19, 2023

He then argued that the court’s suggested security changes would not do much to prevent similar leaks in the future — but it might discourage the justices and clerks from freely circulating memos and decision drafts as they have in the past.

Turley’s overall conclusion The simple truth was that failure to punish the leaker would make other leakers feel justified in taking similar actions whenever it seemed appropriate.

“In this age of rage, this danger will only grow. Someone felt that they had license to leak. Some others may now feel that they have the impunity to do so,” He said.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases