So the news of the opinion came out a little early. Will is. It be the law of the land? Of course this breaks tradition , but what practical difference does it make?

It undermines the Supreme Courts trust in itself. Justices may not confer with their other judges because they will fear a leak such as this.

It doesn't, it's just the expectation on our side that Republicans will always find a way to screw up a golden opportunity (*Biden's complete abomination of a "presidency"

Since this is not a final, issued opinion, this leak was an effort to coerce justices to change mind during the otherwise private process the Supreme Court goes through on an opinion.

If they rule differently than what's expected it's another massive conspiracy that suggests our government is corrupt beyond repair. The courts have to be above politics but if they rule to affirm Roe after it leaking they would rule to overturn them we can no longer claim that.

It's a Hail Mary attempt by the dissenting side to attempt to influence those who may be wavering.

The harm comes in creating a threat to the workings w/in the court. It is meant to try and sway votes to stop the direction it is going. As someone said in another thread, the left position on all things now is "do what we want or we will be violent."

This was a stunt by the dems to take heat off of a horrible president and poorly performing administration. Don't look there, look over here!

Democrat's freak out.
Threaten Justices and their families.
Bribe justices with fame and fortune if they change vote.
Push to pack the court before this ruling comes out
Use this to raise money for elections
Deflect from other issues like inflation etc...

It's only one judge's opinion, it's not the court's opinion.

Leaking it as though it was the opinion of the court is intended to make the other judge's change their stance due to the backlash and threats made from the leak.

This also lets states threaten legal action, or if they're actually constructive, make laws that will allow them to continue abortions.

It's a democrat ploy to help the midterms.

Early voting just started in GA. The timing is highly suspect.

If we end up with Stacey fricken Abrams…. Yuk.

blackmail. Dems will threaten to pack the court unless the preliminary decision is overturned

Now we have not just the prospect of mass riots influencing their decision, we will have the actual riots and all the resulting bloody mess and destroyed cities influencing their decision.

Because this may not have been the final version and it damages legitimate debate of the opinion

CM Trump Voter said:

---

So the news of the opinion came out a little early. Will is. It be the law of the land? Of course this breaks tradition , but what practical difference does it make?

---

It's a draft, not the final opinion. Justices switch sides as the opinion evolves. This is an attempt to influence the opinion before it is finalized.

1872walker said:

---

It's a Hail Mary attempt by the dissenting side to attempt to influence those who may be wavering.

---

This.

It's the hill the left is prepared to die on. And you can either accommodate them, or suffer their eventual wrath.

Time to decide.

Are we done being shocked at the lengths lefty anarchists will go? Are we finished with the pearl clutching?

Get prepared because it gets worse, way worse.

GeorgiAg said:

---

It's a democrat ploy to help the midterms.

Early voting just started in GA. The timing is highly suspect.

If we end up with Stacey fricken Abrams…. Yuk.

---

Well, you both like Biden soooooo..... what's the problem?

Clob94 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

It's a democrat ploy to help the midterms.

Early voting just started in GA. The timing is highly suspect.

If we end up with Stacey fricken Abrams…. Yuk.

---

Well, you both like Biden soooooo..... what's the problem?

---

I like Kemp. He make Orange Man mad.

rocky the dog said:

---

---

And get replaced with a Biden appointee? Not helpful.

Quote:

---

So the news of the opinion came out a little early. Will is. It be the law of the land? Of course this breaks tradition , but what practical difference does it make?

---

We are not a nation of mob rule.
Court decisions have a procedure.
This is not official. It is rumor at this point.
Leaking stuff like this is BS.
If it was leaked then that person(s) should kiss their years of law schooling goodbye and should never, ever practice law.
IF this turns out to be bogus, then Politico has punked the nation.

Rumor is a clerk for the low IQ Latina leaked it. Now if I was another justice. From now on I would not engage with her on other cases. You have to work with these same 8 people the rest of your life. You will never agree on every case but you absolutely have to have respect, trust, integrity, and collaboration within that team. She broke the relationship purely for selfish political reasons. Should at least be censured if not disbarred.

Gaw617 said:

---

Rumor is a clerk for the low IQ Latina leaked it. Now if I was another justice. From now on I would not engage with her on other cases. You have to work with these same 8 people the rest of your life. You will never agree on every case but you absolutely have to have respect, trust, integrity, and collaboration within that team. She broke the relationship purely for selfish political reasons. Should at least be censured if not disbarred.

---

I'm not certain on how solid the rumor is. However if it is true, if, then she is going to have helped destroy alot of compromise room on the court. I still wonder if Roberts was always a squish or if he was compromised. But this undercuts him the most.

rocky the dog said:

---

---

It's just as likely (maybe more) that it was leaked by a conservative to lock the votes in place.

Time for the gop to go for the throat.

Overturn Roe AND begin removal procedures for Sotomayor. Win the presidential election at about the time Sotomayor is officially removed. Replace with conservative judge. Checkmate.

It's a first draft opinion. It's not uncommon for the justices to vote, internally, initially, on a ruling, one of the justices in that majority to be assigned to draft the initial opinion, circulate it, and the justices that voted that way to disagree with some aspects of the opinion or to even change their mind altogether.

In this particular case, a majority of justices could have agreed to uphold the MS law banning abortion after 15 weeks, Alito was assigned the opinion, wrote a complete reversal of Roe but one or two of the voting majority could disagree with that result. They could write a concurring opinion, agreeing the MS law should be upheld, but disagreeing that Roe be overturned. The net effect, then, would be MS law is upheld but Roe stands.

Ultimately, it is likely some clerk/staffer intentionally released this initial draft to gin up public opinion to try and sway some of the justices to change their vote in some manner.

amercer said:

---

rocky the dog said:

---

---

It's just as likely (maybe more) that it was leaked by a conservative to lock the votes in place.

---

No. Just doesn't jive at all. Not with that side of the court anyway.

CrottyKid said:

---

Time for the gop to go for the throat.

Overturn Roe AND begin removal procedures for Sotomayor. Win the presidential election at about the time Sotomayor is officially removed. Replace with conservative judge. Checkmate.

---

umm, so the GOP is getting to 67 seats prior to 2024?

It doesn't jive on F16, because libs evil stuff.

But it actually makes the most sense if Roberts was already squishy and there was fear he might take another conservative with him to make some compromise.

There was zero to achieve by a lib leaking this, since it will only harden positions on both sides.

Quote:

---

There was zero to achieve by a lib leaking this, since it will only harden positions on both sides.

---

or, you know, it could just be plain old moral indignation by a clerk

Now there is also the option that the leak wasn't strategic, and was just a low level person trying to be the first to get it out, or to stir outrage. I could see that coming from either side of there was a clerk that wanted 5 minutes of fame.

Like cone just said…

safe money IMO is it's a liberal wing clerk, probably under Sotomayor

two questions:

- do we ever get a positive ID of the leaker? not sure we will. wouldn't be surprised either way.

- will the justice that the clerk worked for condemn the leak? also, not exactly sure.


just another click of the institutional destruction ratchet

let me walk back a bit

we are absolutely going to know who the leaker is, eventually. they're going to want to take credit.

but i'll be pretty surprised if we know in the short term.

GeorgiAg said:

---

It's a democrat ploy to help the midterms.

Early voting just started in GA. The timing is highly suspect.

If we end up with Stacey fricken Abrams…. Yuk.

---

Early voting for the midterms...or for the runoffs?