>
Nobody knows anything.
Newly retired Liberal Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer told CNN’s Chris Wallace in an interview that, to his knowledge, the identity of the mysterious leaker of Judge Samuel Alito’s draft advisory on the nullification of Roe v. Wade remains unknown. is.
According to a transcript from the network, Wallace asked about the leak, which happened in May: “Within 24 hours, the Chief Justice ordered an investigation into the leaker. Did they find him or her?’
‘Not to my knowledge, but . . . I’m not aware of it,” Breyer said. Wallace insisted, “So in those months after that, the chief justice never said, ‘Hey, do we have our husband or wife?’ ‘
‘Not to my knowledge,’ says Breyer, who has an office at the Supreme Court despite his retirement.
His confession comes as a massive leak investigation is underway, the most shocking in Supreme Court history.
It remains unclear whether the leaked draft was shared by a liberal who was outraged by plans to end Roe v. Wade — which took place in June — or by a conservative who hoped to gain support for the planned measure.
The interview will air on Sunday on ‘Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?’
Newly retired Liberal Supreme Court judge Stephen Breyer said he has not been informed of the investigation since he left the court, but to his knowledge the leaker has not been caught.
The infamous leaked draft opinion was written by Judge Samuel Alito
Justice Stephen Breyer was nominated by then-President Bill Clinton. He is pictured with his fellow judges in April 2021, before his retirement and replacement by Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson
Responsibility for identifying the leaker has fallen to Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley, although it appears efforts to identify them are no further ahead.
Other judges have also recently suggested that the leaker’s identity remains unknown to the court.
At a conference in Colorado this month, Judge Neil Gorsuch said it is “terribly important” to identify the leaker and expects a report on the progress of the investigation. ‘I hope soon.’
Justice Elena Kagan also recently said she doesn’t know if the investigation Roberts ordered has pinpointed the source of the leak.
In May, a Washington Post report speculated that the leaker may be someone who works as a clerk for one of the judges.
The Post article notes that the lawyers chosen to become a clerk are increasingly selected for their political ideology, as well as for their legal prowess.
A ABC news The report speculated that the leaker was someone from the conservative wing of the court who did so in the hopes that the publicity the leak would bring would earn the five-vote majority.
Responsibility for identifying the leaker rests with Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley, a former army colonel and military lawyer.
She has not commented on how her investigation is going.
“I am convinced that if the truth can be found here, it will discover it and present it in an unbiased manner,” retired Army Brigade said. Gene. Patrick Huston, her immediate supervisor at the Pentagon in her last military job before the Supreme Court.
Huston said he was incredibly impressed with Curley and that she had a great reputation as a leader, but even as her two-year-old boss, he didn’t know if she had a husband or children.
In May, a Washington Post report speculated that the leaker may be someone who works as a clerk for one of the judges.
Kate Shaw, an associate of the network’s Supreme Court, said: “The publicity will deter them from doing this because they will be concerned about sending a message that they were somehow harassed into their change voice through public backlash and or public encouragement.’
It’s also possible that the leak came from someone so upset by the prospect of overthrowing Roe that it was paramount to inform the public as soon as possible.
In 1973, Chief Justice Warren Burger was outraged by the leak of the outcome of the Roe case just hours before its announcement.
Burger threatened to subject employees to lie detector tests, but the leaker quickly came forward and explained it was an accident.
Earlier in the interview, Breyer said he was “very, very, very sorry” for being on the losing side of the Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade.
“And you said did I like this Dobbs decision? Of course I didn’t. Of course I didn’t,” he said in an interview with CNN’s Chris Wallace for an interview that aired Sunday night. ‘Was I happy with it? Not a moment. Have I done everything I can to convince people? Of course of course. But there we are and now we move on. We try to work together.’
He warned his Supreme Court colleagues that overly rigid decisions “will come all around you and bite you in the back.”
‘Because you’ll find something that doesn’t work at all. And the Supreme Court, somewhat different from others, has such a spade problem,” Breyer said.
Dobbs destroyed nearly 50 years of precedent, with the conservative judges writing that the implicit “right to privacy” in the constitution did not exist, throwing decisions on abortion laws back to the states.
Judge Stephen Breyer (right), who retired earlier this year, sat down with CNN’s Chris Wallace for an interview to air Sunday
Before the decision was handed down in June, a draft of it was released to the press – an unprecedented leak from a source within the Supreme Court.
Wallace asked, “Was there an earthquake in the court?” when the draft of the Dobbs decision was published in Politico.
‘An earthquake?’ asked Breyer. “It was very damaging because something like that just doesn’t happen. It just doesn’t happen. And here we are.’
Breyer retired earlier this year and was replaced by the first black female judge, Ketanji Brown Jackson.
As a Liberal, he decided to resign while the Democrats controlled both the White House and the Senate.
“There are delays, you know, when the party is split between control of the Senate and control of the presidency,” Breyer said. “And sometimes long times go by and I’d rather my own retirement, my own membership of the court, not get involved in what I call those purely political issues.”
He also declined to criticize Ginni Thomas, wife of conservative judge Clarence Thomas, who has been summoned to testify before the House select committee on Jan. 6 about her role in undoing the results of the 2020 presidential election.
“I’m not going through that because I strongly believe that women who are wives, including wives of Supreme Court justices, should make the decisions about how they live their lives, careers, what kind of careers, etc.,” Breyer said. .
“I’m not going to criticize Ginni Thomas, who I like. I’m not going to criticize Clarence, who I like. And here we are,” the liberal judge added.
Breyer said that while there are “sometimes” two separate camps on the bench, the bitterness is “less than you think.”
“Less than you think … but I can’t say never,” Breyer said. “Maybe a little less cheerful, but I don’t mean — I didn’t hear people shouting angrily at each other in that conference room.”