Saturday, January 28, 2023

Report: It is not known who leaked the abortion decision in the US

After eight months, 126 formal interviews and a 23-page report, the US Supreme Court has failed to discover who leaked the draft of the decision that struck down abortion rights.

With the report released on Thursday, it appears that an investigation was ordered by Chief Justice John Roberts the day after the draft was leaked to Politico, an online publication. At the time, Roberts called the leak a “gross breach of trust”.

The leaked document led to demonstrations in front of the judges’ homes and raised fears for their safety. This happened more than a month before Justice Samuel Alito’s final opinion was issued and the formal announcement of the repeal of the landmark Roe v. Get off

The report also provides insight into the internal procedures of the Court. It acknowledged that the coronavirus pandemic, which expanded people’s ability to work from home, “as well as breaches of court security regulations, created an environment in which it was all too easy to remove sensitive information from building and networks.” court. The report recommends changes to make it more difficult to leak information in the future.

Here’s a look at the report:

What did the report find if it was not the author of the leak?

Negligence and indiscretion. Too many people have access to some confidential information, the report says, and court rules on information security are out of date. For example, courts cannot track who handles highly confidential information and who has access to it.

In addition, some people interviewed by federal investigators called in to assist in the investigation admitted that they did not scrupulously respect the confidentiality policies of the Court. In some cases, the employees admitted that they “discussed with their spouses about the draft opinion or vote count,” the report said.

There appears to have been no hacking, but the report says investigators cannot rule out that the review was inadvertently revealed, “for example, by leaving it in a public place inside or outside the building.”

How extensive was the investigation?

The researchers conducted 126 formal interviews with 97 employees. He inquired about relationships between staff and journalists, including Politico. He examined individual phone call records. He opened the registers of the printers. They also carried out fingerprint analysis of an “object relevant to the investigation”.

Each person interviewed signed an affidavit that they were not the source of the leak. Lying about it may be a violation of the federal misrepresentation law.

After that, former Homeland Security Secretary and former federal judge Michael Chertoff was asked to assess the investigation. In a statement issued by the court, Chertoff deemed it “extensive”.

One question remains: The report does not make clear whether any of the Court’s nine justices were interviewed.

What will change as a result of the investigation?

It seems clear that the court will adjust its rules, perhaps train its equipment and staff, but does not reveal what it has already done or will do next in response to the leak. The researchers came up with a list of recommendations, but these were not included in the public version of the report as a precaution against “potentially harmful people”.

What about inferences about the author?

Following the leak, speculation ran rampant in Washington as to who the source might be. The right pointed to the left side of the courtroom, implying that the source was unhappy with the outcome. The left indicated that it would be someone from the right wing of the court who wanted to ensure that some vacillating members of the majority did not switch sides.

There was speculation on social networks that one of the secretaries could be the source because of their personal background, connections to Politico, or previous writings. The report acknowledges that investigators were cautious.

“The investigators also examined a wide range of public speculation, primarily on social media, about the person who disclosed the document. Several legal secretaries were named in separate messages. No basis was found for the allegations on social media,” the report said.

next steps

The report says that the investigators have not fully completed their work, but indicates that the active investigation is nearing completion. “Investigators are still evaluating and processing some of the electronic data collected and some inquiries are still pending,” he says. “To the extent that additional research provides new evidence or leads, investigators will look into it.”

The final paragraph of the report warns: “Over time, investigation and analysis may provide additional clues that may help identify the source of the leak.”

Nation World News Desk
Nation World News Desk
Nation World News is the fastest emerging news website covering all the latest news, world’s top stories, science news entertainment sports cricket’s latest discoveries, new technology gadgets, politics news, and more.
Latest news
Related news


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here