Whitehouse and Johnson ask former DHS secretary for information on Supreme Court leak

Two Democratic lawmakers asked an exfederal judge to look into the probe into the leakage of the Supreme CourtTo provide more detail about their role in the inquiry, they requested a draft of his opinion on abortion. This was after it became clear that he had financial ties the court.

A letter was addressed to Michael Chertoff (ex-secretary of the Department of Homeland SecuritySenator Sheldon Whitehouse (D–RI) and Rep. Hank Johnson, (D–GA) both pointed out a CNN story that showed Chertoff’s private risk assessment firm was contracted by the court for security-related analysis in recent years. This report also revealed his connection to Chief Justice John Roberts.

TED CRUZ CLASHES WITH MERRICK GARLAND OVER DOJ RESPONSE TO SUPREME COURT LEAK: ‘YOU DID NOTHING’

“The Court’s failure to explain adequately why it felt a third-party review was necessary, how it chose that reviewer, and its preexisting relationship with the reviewer all warrant additional clarity,” According to the February 23rd, letter according CNN

According to sources familiar with the situation, the Chertoff Group had in January billed the Supreme Court more than $1 million. This raised questions as to whether the firm was able objectively verify the leak investigation. The Supreme Court ruled that no efforts were made to locate the leaker. virtually inconclusive.

Chertoff also had financial connections with the court. He was educated at the Ivy League and maintained personal relationships to the justices. Roberts and Chertoff served as law clerks for the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit in consecutive years.

Ellen Murray, spokeswoman of the Chertoff Group indicated that a reply to the letter would soon be provided.

In January, the Supreme Court published its report detailing the leak investigation that was led by Marshal Gail Curley of High Court. public summary These are her conclusions in regard to the publication of the abortion draft opinion. Politico In May of last year. Chertoff provided an additional statement, indicating that Curley’s investigation efforts had been satisfactory in spite of the non-conclusive nature the inquiry over nearly nine months.

They also added that the in “this Court matter, peculiarities abound, including the different treatment given to the justices, the Court’s suggestion that the motive may have been a ‘misguided attempt at protest,’ and the use of a third party to review the Marshal’s investigation.”