The Supreme Court investigation has not yet determined who leaked the draft abortion recommendation to Politico

The Supreme Court has not yet been able to determine what led Politico to send a draft opinion earlier this year that showed a majority of justices were willing to rule on Roe v. Wade.

“At this time, based on a preponderance of the evidence, it is not possible to determine the identity of any person who may have disclosed the document or how the draft opinion came to Politico,” a report said. by the court marshal. . “No one has admitted to disclosing the document, and none of the available forensic or other evidence provided any basis for identifying an individual as the source of the document.”

The report did not completely rule out the possibility of a break-in or that the sightings were “accidentally or negligently disclosed, such as by being left in a public area inside or outside the building.”

What stood out, however, was the admission that investigators lacked solid leads, as the report highlighted the large number of employees who were given access to the draft recommendation without stronger safeguards to prevent leaks. The majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, was sent to a mailing list of 70 users on February 10, with 10 others eventually gaining access. Paper copies were also distributed in some rooms, bringing the total number with access to 82 in addition to the judges themselves.

The researchers concluded that if it was an employee of the court or someone who had access to an employee’s residence, that person could act with impunity due to insufficient security regarding the moving of paper documents from the court to his home, the absence mechanisms to track print jobs on court printers and copiers, and other security or policy vulnerabilities.

Politico released its report on the draft opinion on May 2 and announced that in its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health’s decision follows Roe vs. Cotton wool. That’s exactly what happened the next month, when the Supreme Court issued a final Dobbs opinion, ending the nearly 50-year Roe precedent. After the leak, Chief Justice John Roberts ordered an investigation into the leak amid endless speculation about who might have the means and motives.

In addition to a forensic examination of the digital image of the opinion on the Politico website, investigators said they were looking into connections between staffers and reporters and were “paying close attention” to all contacts with “any person associated with Politico.”

“The researchers also assessed the wide range of public speculation, mainly on social media, about an individual who may have disclosed the document,” the report said. “Different employees were appointed to different positions. In their investigation, the researchers found nothing to substantiate the social media claims surrounding the revelation.

The researchers conducted 126 formal interviews with 97 court employees. Each signed an affidavit that they disclosed the information to outside parties outside of court.

“Some of those interviewed admitted to telling their spouses about the draft opinion or the vote count and commented accordingly on their affidavits,” the report said.

While it is not clear that leaking the advice violated the law, it did violate the court’s code of conduct and other confidentiality guidelines.

The sheriff’s office said it will continue to look for any new evidence or leads, but the report shows they missed something vital.

“After examining the court’s computer equipment, networks, printers and available call and text logs, investigators found no forensic evidence about who released the draft opinion,” the report said.

The report, which came from Gail Curley, the court marshal, did not say whether the judges themselves were questioned or whether their electronic devices were examined.