46 and 2 = drama queen.

Good grief man....this is not about religion, never has been. It's about murdering babies and whether or not that right is preserved in the Constitution (it's not).

I don't see this affecting any votes in November at all. The far left will take to the streets but we know how they will vote regardless. The election is six months away, a lot can change or be forgotten by then.

All of problems the left has created will only get worse as we go through the summer. That is what will be on the voters mind.

On a slightly different but relevant topic…

Does anyone actually know if clerks and other staff actually have to sign some sort of confidentially agreement and are there written consequences to violating this agreement?

I’d be curious to find out…

Every honest lawyer knows Roe v Wade was a terrible decision, devoid of legal reasoning. It is an activist judge’s fantasy, and dangerous precedent, for anyone who believes in the rule of law.

The Left’s current fascination with weaponizing the mob, hasn’t been seen since Jim Crow.

I have no doubt that is the intent behind the leak.

Hopefully the legal profession has enough integrity to pillory the leaker.

I don’t think it’s really about Roe v Wade. The Dems are already coming out and saying Congress needs to pass a law to protect abortion rights and since the senate doesn’t have the votes, they need to end the filibuster. That’s the real play, leak something that will stir up lots of controversy and demand something be done to stop it. Filibuster goes away and their agenda is free to ram down the peoples throats. Or they will use it as an opportunity to pack the courts “for justice”.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Syngin1066,

My opinion is that the leak was intended to do two things:

1. Have protesters try to influence the SC justices
2. Fire up leftists for the November election

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...itive-midterm-races/

Pro-abortion groups have introduced a $150 million spending plan ahead of several competitive 2022 midterm races, Politico reported Monday.

Planned Parenthood Action Fund, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and EMILY’s List — all groups that believe women have the “right” to end the lives of their unborn children — are going to spend funds on “paid ads, field programs, messaging research and polling in nine states, all of which feature top congressional and gubernatorial races this fall.”

“The spending will be spread across offices up and down the ballot, from state legislative races to Senate races, in Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, California, Kansas and Wisconsin. Of the nine states, six are home to competitive Senate races, and all are electing governors in November,” according to the report.

An April poll from the Wall Street Journal found that more Americans favor the idea of a 15-week abortion ban than oppose it. A Knights of Columbus/Marist Poll released earlier this year found that 71 percent of Americans support legal limits on abortion. Broken down by political affiliation, 49 percent of Democrats, 93 percent of Republicans, and 70 percent of independents support limits on abortion.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Politico was well aware of how unprecedented this leak was. But they still published it.

And how did all these protestors know to show up at the SC so quickly last night? They must have been given advance notice, this is such a setup

I doubt if Roberts will do anything to pursue the leaker, hell HE could have been the leaker.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
This is nothing but distraction.

Anyone giving it anymore weight than that, is a fool.

My thoughts exactly.

I am curious to hear the left’s talking points on this. Maybe 46 and 2 can lay them out.
Are we going to hear that it’s about women’s rights from a group that can’t define what a woman is? Will we again hear that men have no business telling a birthing person what to do?
Or the old “my body my choice” slogan which was recently ignored by the entire federal government.
What exactly will be energizing the left? A love of hypocrisy?

Politics is the exercise of religious views - and our country was created by those who voted with their feet to escape persecution for their religious views. They came here because they didn't want one specific brand of religious view to dominate politics and the conduct of the colonies was hands off as far as any "test" being required.

Liberals created that test demanding that a Democrat candidate support Roe V Wade and it's existence as such is why we have serious division today.

Imagine the reaction if abortion is finally upheld and the liberals twerking in our face over it?

If someone would usher in a communist regime in order to prevent the loss of this test then they aren't conservative and certainly are a declared enemy of the Constitution working to abolish free speech. That is a declaration of treason.

It's always funny how leftists & progressives will demand their imagined "rights" that they think the Founding Fathers intended under the Constitution, but "Shall Not Be Infringed" is still open to interpretation.

That this document was leaked is unprecedented; my understanding is that Politico went through extreme lengths to verify that it was not a fake.

I would expect, (and hope) that the Chief Justice will leave no stone unturned in attempting to determine the source of this leek.

You expect this behavior and miss trust in Washington overall, you do not expect it from the United States Supreme Court.

This should not have happened.

quote:

Originally posted by smlsig:
Does anyone actually know if clerks and other staff actually have to sign some sort of confidentially agreement and are there written consequences to violating this agreement?

I’d be curious to find out…

Laura Ingraham clerked for the SC and was near apoplectic about this last night. Yes, they do have to sign some sort of confidentially agreement. And they were admonished on Day 1 by Rehnquist, with the all of the clerks present, that if they violate this trust their legal careers were over.
We'll see if that still stands.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
That this document was leaked is unprecedented; my understanding is that Politico went through extreme lengths to verify that it was not a fake.

I would expect, (and hope) that the Chief Justice will leave no stone unturned in attempting to determine the source of this leek.

You expect this behavior and miss trust in Washington overall, you do not expect it from the United States Supreme Court.

This should not have happened.

It was most likely some law clerk who considers themself as sort of hero, and I hope they're uncovered. I doubt any law firm, with any integrity would hire such an unscrupulous person, but I'm probably wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Tirod:
Politics is the exercise of religious views - and our country was created by those who voted with their feet to escape persecution for their religious views.
...
Liberals created that test demanding that a Democrat candidate support Roe V Wade and it's existence as such is why we have serious division today.

Yes, all laws are attempts to enforce someone's idea of morality.
The only question is who gets to decide?
This decision, if it holds, merely returns that decision to the people in the States rather than 5 hacks in black deciding for us. Yes, the Roe v Wade decision stirred up a hornets nest of contempt for the Court which has now been ongoing for 50 years.

“And they were admonished on Day 1 by Rehnquist, with the all of the clerks present, that if they violate this trust their legal careers were over.
We'll see if that still stands.”

My guess is that if they are anywhere right of center, they’re fired. If left leaning, they’ll be hailed as heroes of democracy and keep their jobs. That’s how little faith I have in our government while under despotic democRAT control.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
I'd bet that it was a staffer and not a Justice. And a far left one at that.

That'd be my take as well. My money would be on a staffer for one of the usual suspects.

If the Leaker was a lawyer, they will be disbarred. Career over.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/...he-supreme-court.php



POSTED ON MAY 2, 2022 BY STEVEN HAYWARD IN ABORTION, SUPREME COURT
ASTOUNDING LEAK FROM THE SUPREME COURT
Liberals love to bleat on these days about how Republicans have been breaching “democratic norms,” but late today one of the most sacrosanct norms of our political order was breached: Someone leaked a draft Supreme Court opinion striking down Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in the pending case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Association.

The opinion, drafted by Justice Samuel Alito, is 98 pages long, and I’m going to want to read through it carefully before offering conclusions or analysis. But some of the language in the opinion on a first skim seems promising, such as “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start.” Heh: The left has been saying for years now that a liberal Court could overturn precedents they hate such as Citizens United under the heading that it was “wrong the day it was decided.” More:


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.



A complete draft opinion has never leaked from the Supreme Court before, and it has long been understood that anyone (especially a law clerk) who leaked an opinion would be kissing their legal career goodbye. This is why I think the leak probably came from one of the Justices. And my money is on Sonia Sotomayor, who is by far the most politicized Justice on the Court, though she will soon have company when Ketanji Brown-Jackson joins the Court.

A leak of the opinion is surely a desperate attempt to stir up a public firestorm (so the left hopes) that will cause a Justice to switch his or her vote at the last minute. (It also provides desperate Democrats with something to distract from inflation, crime, education, Biden’s senility, etc.) This suggests the Court’s vote was 5 – 4, likely with Roberts once again defecting. The media isn’t even trying to disguise the purpose of this leak. Politico “reports”:

Deliberations on controversial cases have in the past been fluid. Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading, sometimes until just days before a decision is unveiled. The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months. . .



No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending. The unprecedented revelation is bound to intensify the debate over what was already the most controversial case on the docket this term.

I am certain that Breyer and Kagan are NOT happy about this leak, whatever their strong feelings about the issue. Could a Justice be impeached for leaking an opinion? It would be grounds for disbarment for any lawyer. Stay tuned. . .

UPDATE: An angry crowd of lefties (is there any other kind?) is already gathering on the steps of the Supreme Court to protest.

UPDATE 2—He mole hunt is under way.

It is reprehensible that someone at the Supreme Court would intentionally leak the draft decision.

Something I don't hear mentioned much is that medical advances have moved fetal viability to a much earlier point in the pregnancy than was accepted when Roe v. Wade was decided. A lot of people have changed their opinion on abortion due to a change in viability assessment. The Mississippi law that is the case in point would prohibit abortion after 15 weeks, well before a fetus is viable. But, the viability question will be at the center of arguments in state legislatures that don't ban abortion outright.