Reply to Bombshell: NYT story suggests Alito is the leaker of Dobbs decision

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Bombshell: NYT story suggests Alito is the leaker of Dobbs decision "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Alito denied the Hobby Lobby leak story but contemporaneous emails show it’s true.
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fh9AZH9WIAIza77?format=jpg&name=large[/img][/quote]

Um, no - nothing shows that this is true.  It's one person's word against another's.  I'm inclined to believe the Supreme Court Justice, but YMMV.  [/quote]

Why.  There is nothing to indicate Alito is a trustworthy person.

What elitism on your part.  [/quote]

I see it more this way: there have always been contained leaks to interested parties, but they're not reported upon because the parties concerned know better than to blab to the media. 
This time there's this Schenke person, who is likely a little disturbed (no one would work as hard as he has for decades to ban abortion, only to change their mind), and he's building a case to target Alito for the Dobbs leak. 
Fine. I certainly wouldn't put it past him to leak that. 
But the reality is, he's not the first Justice to leak and he won't be the last. It's part of the SC process, all the Justices know it and they should have ways to pre-empt and cope.[/quote]

Then say leaks are just fine and dandy. Don’t say they are impeachable if it is a liberal but no big deal if it is a conservative, which the Republican position on everything. What we know is Schenke received leaked information about the Hobby Lobby decision that turned out to be true and he knew who the source was. The circumstances and motivation were similar for Hobbs so why not start by investigating the guy who has the motive and is likely to have leaked before? [/quote]

I am not the poster who said leaks were impeachable. Neither are they fine and dandy. It's just a pesky side activity of the Supreme Court, given the stakes, and they should be kept to a minimum. That means having some consequences for Justices who get too close to interested parties, and it means consequences for Justices who leak.

Unfortunately, there really is no mechanism provided in the Constitution that's in the middle ground. Perhaps we need to change that. Also, I think the Justices end up getting quite bonded to each other (even across the political spectrum), so I don't think one would rat out the other. It's likely some know already. None of them have said anything, because you know what? Next time, they might leak.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics