Audio Sources - Full Text Articles

A Supreme Court marshal found no ‘credible leads’ that justices or their spouses leaked the draft Dobbs decision — but also didn’t ask them to swear on it either

Supreme Court abortionProtesters, demonstrators and activists gather in front of the U.S. Supreme Court as the justices hear arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, a case about a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks, on December 01, 2021.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

  • The Supreme Court marshal said Friday that she interviewed the justices after the draft Dobbs leak.
  • “I spoke with each of the Justices, several on multiple occasions,” Marshal Gail A. Curley said.
  • On Thursday, the court said it did not have a “preponderance” of evidence to identify a leaker.

The head of the investigation into the leak of a Supreme Court decision overturning the national right to an abortion said Friday that she interviewed the justices themselves, “several on multiple occasions,” but found no evidence implicating them or their spouses.

The statement comes a day after the Supreme Court issued a report concerning the unauthorized release of the draft Dobbs decision, asserting that it was unable “to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence.”

A draft of the opinion had been leaked to the press in May 2022. A month later, the Supreme Court issued its final 6-3 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, prompting several states to impose strict restrictions on the termination of a pregnancy.

In the statement issued Friday, Supreme Court Marshal Gail A. Curley said she had spoken to all the justices during the course of her investigation, some more than once.

“I followed up on all credible leads, none of which implicated the justices or their spouses,” Curley, who has served as head of security for the court since June 2021, said in the statement. “On this basis, I did not believe that it was necessary to ask the justices to sign sworn affidavits.”

That is in contrast to how the court’s staff was treated. According to the report issued Thursday, investigators spoke to 97 court personnel, all of whom were required to swear to the truth of what they were saying.

“At the conclusion of the initial interviews, each employee was asked to sign an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, affirming that he or she did not disclose the Dobbs draft opinion to any person not employed by the Supreme Court,” the report stated. Some, the report noted, had indeed “admitted to telling their spouses about the draft opinion or vote county, so they annotated their affidavits to that effect.”

Have a news tip? Email this reporter:

Read the original article on Business Insider