↓
 
Home » Politico publishes SCOTUS leak on overturning Roe

Politico publishes SCOTUS leak on overturning Roe

The New Neo Posted on by

It’s another giant step down the road to the ruin of the tacit agreements that allowed this country to function in a relatively peaceful manner. First we have the leak of Alito’s alleged majority opinion overturning Roe, and then the publication by Politico – although I wouldn’t expect the press to restrain itself, since this leak was most likely perpetrated by the left to attain some of the goals of the left.

There are multiple articles about the leak and the opinion just about everywhere, and I suggest reading some at Legal Insurrection, Powerline, and RedState. This one is of interest as well.

Goals? Intimidation of conservative justices: check.
Inflaming of Democrat voters: check.

One thing we do know is that the 98-page draft is authentic, because Justice Roberts has confirmed that, while adding that it’s not a final opinion, calling for an investigation by the SCOTUS marshal, and saying that the Court’s work will be unaffected.

I’ll leave aside the question of who leaked it, because it’s very speculative at this point, but most of the chit-chat centers on Sotomayor and/or a clerk of hers who is graduate of Yale Law School. Most law schools have become leftist activist training centers these days.

But the leak could even have been perpetrated by someone on the right, although I think the chances of that are extremely low, since the leak this would seem more likely to serve the purposes of the left. However, if the leak is specifically meant to intimidate John Roberts into upholding Roe – as so many people believe, and I tend to concur with that – and the vote against Roe was already 5-3 without him, then what purpose would a Roberts change of vote serve? If he joins the pro-Roe side the vote still only comes to 5-4 against. I’m not sure whether the difference between 6-3 and 5-4 is a difference that matters, although I suppose the closer the vote the more it fuels the leftist drive for court-packing (which already is probably quite well-fueled).

What are the political consequences if Roe is overturned? I believe that most Americans are unaware of what overturning Roe would do in the legal sense, because the left doesn’t want them to know. So many people appear to think it would outlaw abortion, but that’s certainly not true. It would allow a state to do so, however, and the reality is that not too many states would be likely to ban it outright, and those states almost certainly would be strongly red states. Blue states would keep very lenient abortion laws, and purple states would probably have some abortion but restrict it somewhat.

However, the left does not surrender ground once won. All leftist ground is sacred. Repealing Roe is considered a kind of sacrilege to what has become the leftist religion, and it cannot be allowed.

As for the leak itself, as commenter “MBunge” says:

This leak, if it’s accurate, is possibly the most outrageous and damning betrayal of U.S. legal community ethics in history. Even John Roberts is going to be enraged by this and he’ll be joined by any pundit or legal thinker out there who even pretends to believe in judicial independence and integrity.

This is the Left almost literally declaring war on the U.S. federal court system.

However, now it’s done. It’s of a piece with so much recent court intimidation by the left. The left must think this is a winning hand, but I’m not at all sure. Biden and Democrats are hugely unpopular right now for other reasons, and most people who would be extremely outraged by a Roe repeal may have already been among the minority planning to vote for Democrats. It would be nice if the GOP could get out the word that repealing Roe merely throws the question back to the states, because that might allay some fears as well. I also don’t understand the assumption that this will only rally the left, because it seems to me that it could also energize the right, which finally smells victory in its long fight against Roe, a victory which only could have happened with Court appointments by Republicans.

The left is indeed energized to demonstrate, however. Going back to the summer of 2020 and all the riots doesn’t seem to be a winning hand for them either, but who knows? They’re been playing the January 6th Insurrection card for so long that it might make them look like hypocrites as well to start (or revive) their own insurrection. But the appearance of hypocrisy has never been much of a stumbling block for them before, and I doubt it will be now.

Comments

Politico publishes SCOTUS leak on overturning <i>Roe</i> — 79 Comments

  2. I think if this ruling stands that this can show some of the “both parties are the same” and “I won’t vote for a RINO” people that even if it takes a long time you may get the result you want with Republicans but you will never get it with Democrats.

  3. Bigotry… hypocrisy, most sanctimonious.

    There is no mystery in sex and conception, a woman, and man, have four choices, and self-defense through reconciliation.

    It is a strawman parading as a strawclown that a woman, or man, has an open right to elect abortion of another human life. There is even an individual, community, national, and human interest to mitigate the progress of self-abortion.

    The first step is to acknowledge the symmetry of viability at the beginning and end of life, of baby and of granny, albeit, barring Her Choice with a capital “H”, approaching different near limits: life and death, respectively.

    Planned parent/hood is a wicked solution to a purportedly hard problem: social progress, redistributive change, clinical cannibalism, and fair weather causes. The nominally “secular” Pro-Choice “ethical” religion denies women and men’s dignity and agency, and reduces human life to a negotiable commodity. Deja vu.

  4. Here is the thing.

    Overturning ROE V WADE does not prohibit something. It makes it subject to the laws of each state. Or federal legislation. It simply says that such a right is not addressed in the constitution.

    I think that is obviously correct. But as usual the left fails to understand this basic premise and believe it does the opposite.

    Its analogous to the mask rules. Saying masks are NOT required does not prevent you from wearing them. Or even that other entities could pass legislation to address it. They once again have the understanding exactly backwards.

    Had we chosen to stop taking shortcuts and do these things through the proper legislative processes. Then there would be far less acrimony. But then I think acrimony is part of the goal.

  5. Seems to me that, unless this inspires an obviously connected knock-on event much closer to the mid-terms, the energy will have been dissipated.

    Also, how many justices will be sent photos of their kids or grandkids at the school bus stop? I know, the left would never stoop so low.

  6. “But the appearance of hypocrisy has never been much of a stumbling block for them before, and I doubt it will be now.”

    That’s an interesting question, and one I’ve been wondering about a lot over the past few years as they’ve gotten more and more eager to clamp down on free speech. My speculation (just that) is that they don’t even see the hypocrisy, that they are so possessed by their own sense of righteousness that they can’t see it. I’ve remarked for many years on how un-self-aware they are in this and other respects.

  7. mythx
    I disagree with your last sentence. The left knows it exactly. They hope to fool a sufficient number of voters and would-be rioters who can be fooled.

  8. Richard Aubrey:.

    Exactly.

    I will add that for many on the left the idea of abortion not being freely available everywhere in the US is unconscionable.

  9. Richard Aubrey,Neo.

    I tend to agree that there is a significant portion of the leftists understand that. Many I believe are mentally ill (take a bow Taylor Lorenz). That is not an excuse for their abominable behavior. But explains some of it.

    But I think their are some who have simply been so insulated from any other opinion. And frankly who have never been instructed in basic logic. That are basically ignorant and not malicious.

    I have no idea what percentage of their group this may be. But I would like to take some time to try to explain the position in a coherent manner. Before turning our plowshares into swords.

  10. I don’t see how the publication of this draft opinion really helps the left in any significant way. It might even make Roberts angry enough to cast his vote with the majority to make it 6-3. I also don’t think this is terribly helpful to the left for the fall elections, either now or when the final opinion is published. As Neo says, most people for whom unlimited abortion on demand is a first-order issue were probably already going to vote Democrat. Once people realize that most states are still going to allow abortion without limits for the first three months of pregnancy, more or less, the hysteria will die down and people will focus on inflation.

    The major impact of this is the damage to trust and collegiality at the Court. Destroying institutions is what the left does.

  11. The ramifications of Roberts potentially siding with the majority is that he can then assign who writes the opinion. With the 5-4 split, Thomas assigns the opinion (as the senior-most justice in the majority).

    You could imagine that a Thomas-assigned opinion will have more teeth than a Roberts-assigned opinion would.

  12. It should be pointed out that Sagaar Enjeti on Breaking Points brought up the possibility that, since this story was broken by a reporter with a background covering national security, this leak might actually have been from someone in the intelligence community who was monitoring Supreme Court emails.

    I’m not sure if that’s better or worse than a leak from inside the Court itself.

    Mike

  14. Or it could have been leaked from the White House, not that Brandon would meddle or sabotage the SCOTUS (Bork, Bork) …..

  15. The left believes this leak will energize its base. But they’re already energized. And for the vast middle this will likely have faded away by November. Because most people will have figured out it will be up to the states.

    Ideally, they would have leaked this in October but the term ends before July I believe. So they did what they could.

    This however, further shows to what lengths the left will go to and in the long run only hurts their chances to advance their agenda. You know, criminals on the street, more illegal aliens, the normalization of pedophilia, and unending stagflation. Oh, and submission face masks.

  19. It’s relatively clear what the White House’s take is. They couldn’t care less about the leak and see the draft opinion as big fund raising opportunity for the fall election. After all, I suspect they will be short about $400M in ZuckBucks. (I hope??)

    Once people realize that most states are still going to allow abortion without limits for the first three months of pregnancy, more or less, the hysteria will die down … — Kate

    I’m sorry Kate, but no. There will be a large block that will not understand that, plus a smaller group that will be outraged that anyone would have to cross a state line. The media will help secure the former group’s perception.

    PS: Andrew McCarthy seems to think that the FBI must be brought in to investigate. At first he seemed to intimate a strong should be brought in. Then he said, well they can’t have a grand jury or subpoena power without them.

  20. How about they do away the clerks. Make the justices write their own opinions like they used to do. It’s not like they take on thousands of cases a year and if they are too old or feeble to do this then well…

  21. I was curious about the timing. This whole thing was to be formally decided well before the election anyway. A Mississippi case on the docket. So … what?

    The whole point is to whip up some frenzy for a short time now and have people write checks to the Dems before they realize that this isn’t all that big of a deal?

    I’m warming up to your point Kate. Eventually, most people will figure it out. But maybe it is about the timing of “eventually” and the money.

  23. According to Townhall, BIDEN: “There are so many fundamental rights that are affected by that, and I’m not prepared to leave that to the whims of the public at the moment.”

    Isn’t this an attack on democracy itself?

    Not allowing the people to decide for themselves the extent and limitations of abortion is indeed attacking democracy, certainly according to the Democrat party’s own statements over the past 16-18 months.

  25. Wonderful opinion by Alito.

    I’ll say something I’ve said before about Roberts – Roberts is not a man of the Republican party, nor is he a man of the Democrat party.

    Roberts is a man of the Georgetown Dinner party. He likes to keep on the good side of his hosts at those events.

  26. I get unsolicited text messages on my phone. One just came in, from a Democrat in the neighboring congressional district, saying that without Roe she’d be dead, because she had “an abortion” for her ectopic pregnancy. No abortion law prohibits operations for ectopic pregnancy. Both mother and baby will die; the surgery is done to save the one life which can be saved. Democrats are definitely appealing to the stupid and uninformed.

  27. Never in a million years did I think Roe was going to be overturned. The unintended(?) consequence of the leak is that it gives those of us who are shocked, time to get used to the idea and dilutes the effectiveness of any protests.

  28. I fully expect riots this weekend throughout the country. Nice weather and this leak is just an excuse to steal stuff and create havoc.

  29. Here we go.

    Laurence Tribe, the constitutional genius of the left, who has always previously held that Roe v. Wade was bad jurisprudence, had this to say about the leaked draft decision.

    “Predictable next steps after the Alito opinion becomes law: a nationwide abortion ban, followed by a push to roll back rights to contraception, same-sex marriage, sexual privacy, and the full array of textually unenumerated rights long taken for granted,’’ Tribe wrote.

    Riffing on Biden’s old “They’re gonna put y’all back in chains,” he’s saying that they’re going to enslave women in an episode of the Handmaid’s Tale. Oh my, where is my checkbook?

  30. TommyJay,

    Heard some nutter earlier today saying this could lead to a ban on interracial marriage and interstate travel.

  32. “Inflaming of Democrat voters: check.” neo

    “how many justices will be sent photos of their kids or grandkids at the school bus stop? Richard Aubrey

    Nothing exposes the insanity of ideological fanaticism more clearly than an existential threat to a basic tenet.

    Lots of Democrat’s renewing calls to eliminate the Senate filibuster.

  33. Griffin:

    It could lead to forced vaccinations, face masking, or involuntary castration/sterilization/gender reassignment that would be going too, too (tutu) far!

  35. If Roberts believes what he says, that this is an extreme violation of Court ethics and a complete betrayal of the justices personal commitment to the Court, the law, and each other, then he will exert true leadership by counseling each justice to vote as they see fit and in accordance with the law, that he will vow to protect from harm every one of the justices, and he will commit to finding and punishing the leaker.

    I fear though that he is not that sort of leader.

  36. Kate, I sort of agree on your take on the leaks value to Democrats. Now or later, this ruling would have been made, and it would have upset the progressive base all the same. The hesitation is that Democrats have a lot of ground to make up, and perhaps needed this much time. It also gives a significant amount of time for Red States to take action to fully ban abortion.

  37. TommyJay – Larry Tribe lost his mind during the Trump administration. At this point, I would consider his commentary to be political rather than legal.

    Griffin – I appreicate the Megyn Kelly links. That is the first I’ve heard of her show and I like it. I still maintain that Bill Barr is one of the few adults that we’ve had in DC over the past three or more administrations.

  38. Laurence Tribe, the constitutional genius of the left, who has always previously held that Roe v. Wade was bad jurisprudence, had this to say about the leaked draft decision.

    Nope. Prof. Stanley Brubaker placed an article in Commentary in 1989 critiquing Tribe’s writings on Roe v. Wade. In sum, Tribe over a period of 16 years had wandered through four distinct justifications for the decision, never wavering in his conviction it was the right decision. That man was supposedly on Walter Mondale’s short-list for a Supreme Court vacancy. Merrick Garland’s not the only bullet we’ve dodged in the last 50 years.

  39. @Griffin: “Heard some nutter earlier today saying this could lead to a ban on interracial marriage and interstate travel.”

    And yet your nutter, unlike my closest friends, had nothing to say about the coming reversal of Obergefell v. Hodges, not to mention the imminent internment of my fellow queers and me in concentration camps (no doubt the Trump facilities reportedly made ready in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election).

    You need a better class of nutter.

  40. As for the suspect, I’m fascinated to know the name of the school who put him to work as a math and science teacher after he cadged a degree in political science.

  41. At this point, I would consider his commentary to be political rather than legal.

    See Robert Bork’s summary of his jurisprudence, published 30-odd years ago. (“Ordinarily, this would exclude him from serious consideration…”).

  42. I think at least one of those distinct justifications was done in spite of his admission that it was bad jurisprudence. Good or bad jurisprudence is not the same thing as a right or wrong decision. At least in the mind of someone like Tribe.

  43. Ban interstate travel?

    Oh, I see. After the Alito decision, the next step is for Mississippi to put up an Iron Curtain so that MS women can’t get their abortions elsewhere. Because people on the right are the authoritarians.

  44. You don’t have to know all the plays to recognize the playbook. Anonymous leaks? Please spare us your unserious speculation.

    And we also have the coordinated calls today from the various Über-Democrats to ‘immediately end the fillibuster’ and/or ‘pack the Supreme Court’ post-haste. Messages that were probably placed in the ‘Draft’ box a few days ago, ready to hit ‘Send’ at a moment’s notice depending upon how the story breaks.

    I agree with what a previous commenter said, the Republicans, if they are smart, will not harp on the sweet, sweet victory of ending the ‘murder of children’ They would be very smart to strike the moderate, reassuring tone that this simply takes the Federal Government out of the bedroom and defers control of this highly-emotionally-charged issue to the states, where the individual’s regionally-sensitive leaders can do the will of the people in a better way. This would be a winning message, I think – so naturally it will be the last thing the Republicans will do. They’ll probably go all ‘Shouter Baptist’ all over the country, thump their Bibles on ‘God’s Innocent Victims’ and alienate many of their voters.

  45. “However, if the leak is specifically meant to intimidate John Roberts into upholding Roe ”

    Ok, I admit I have not read all previous comments and may be repetitious.

    I am not a conspiracy nut, but as an average person, I believe the left knows something about Roberts that intimidates him.

  46. The leaker will expose itself and become a hero. I guarantee it.
    Pentagon Papers\Watergate style.

  47. I predict that the Merdia’s hyperventilation over Elon Musk and Twitter has reached its sell-by date.

    I’m sure they’ll work it into this newest of crapstorms, of course, but only peripherally.

  48. Roberts is a man of the Georgetown Dinner party. He likes to keep on the good side of his hosts at those events.

    If you say so. My recollection is that Roberts and his wife have a reputation for keeping to themselves. Kavanaugh supposedly has a big bro circle devoted to spectator sports and beer.

  49. The leaker will expose itself and become a hero. I guarantee it.

    Jonathan Turley thinks he’ll be disbarred and, if he lies to federal investigators, prosecuted as well. Turley’s also of the opinion that so few people handle these drafts, investigators have an ace chance of finding the culprit.

    I’m wondering if Roberts assigned it to in house security because he figures they know who is who around the building.

  50. When Woodward & Armstrong’s The Brethren was published, it was reviewed for one of the legal newspapers in New York by Harry Goldman, the retired Presiding Justice of the 4th Department in New York. He said it was a troubling book because its purported source material consisted of accounts delivered in the qt by clerks and quondam clerks. He said in his years as a trial and appellate judge, he had never known such a thing to happen.

  51. Face it — the only real cause for concern over Roe v. Wade is if there are piranhas or barracudas in the water.

  52. I actually briefly wondered if the leak was meant to get pro-lifers excited and then induce them to riot once it turned out to not be the real decision. Maybe lead to another “insurrection” the Democrats can milk for another year. Probably just reading too much into it, though.

    I too never expected SCOTUS to actually go through with a decision completely overturning Roe v. Wade. I do believe abortion should be a state issue, but I always thought a few of the “conservative” justices would chicken out.

  53. If you’ve ever wanted a gauge of just how contemptible the conservative establishment is, consider this:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/03/opinion/abortion-supreme-court-conservative.html?referringSource=articleShare

    The “house conservative” for the New York Times just wrote a column that actually is “The conservative case for NOT overturning Roe v. Wade.” This worthless son of a motherless goat admits Roe v. Wade was a terrible and wrong decision but he thinks overturning it would just be too gosh darn upsetting to liberals, so we should just forget about it. That’s literally his argument and he makes it without once even referencing the idea that abortion is…you know… the murder of innocent human beings.

    He writes that because he knows to write anything else would risk his job with the NYT and THAT’S what has been wrong with the GOP and the Right for these past few decades. They’ve been more concerned with maintaining their positions within the liberal-dominated elite than in either doing what is right or serving the interests of the people they’re supposed to be leading.

    No matter what Donald Trump does, has done in the past, or will do wrong in the future, he deserves eternal praise and respect for starting the destruction of genuine scum like Bret Stephens.

    Mike

  54. To the American left nothing is sacred, no convention is sacrosanct, all disputes are personal, every opposing opinion is violence, and a fight is never over until they have won.

  56. Aggie —

    They would be very smart to strike the moderate, reassuring tone that this simply takes the Federal Government out of the bedroom and defers control of this highly-emotionally-charged issue to the states … They’ll probably go all ‘Shouter Baptist’ all over the country, thump their Bibles on ‘God’s Innocent Victims’ and alienate many of their voters.

    Indeed. I listen to the “Bill Walton Show” podcast, where he had a couple of conservative lawyer/activists on a couple of months ago. They were all in on “send it back to the states” as the justification for overturning Roe, but then turned around and said that as soon as it was overturned they were going to try to get an abortion ban written into federal legislation.

    Dirty pool, says I. And certain to alienate the squishy middle who would be happy to accept the federalism argument and the rough three-month consensus.

  57. Will chamberlain has another candidate, a breyer clerk elizabeth deutsch she has a masters in gender? She wrote law notes on abortion was an aclu fellow on the topic clerked for far left judge pillard and married a post reporter isaac arnstoff who used to share a byline with josh gerstein at politico

  58. Its a bit of a reach but there are a few points that speak for her.

  59. Predict nothing happens badly to said thief. But as said if it all works will be a celebrity. Roberts probably will fold and one other Judge gets cold feet either by pressure or Chucky’s threats it’s over. And will kill a already weak government branch.

  61. Roberts probably will fold

    Unless you mean Roberts’ investigation; I’d say Roberts has already folded. He’s not part of the 5-4 majority. The hope, beyond hope, is that this would convince Roberts that being weak leads to abuse, and it would be better to simply adhere to the Constitution and at least rule on solid ground.

  62. If you’ve ever wanted a gauge of just how contemptible the conservative establishment is, consider this:

    In fairness to the conservative establishment, none of the three bits of controlled opposition employed by The Times have any history as elected officials, legislative staff, patronage appointees, campaign hacks, or lobbyists. They’re all professional editorial writers. Ross Douthat has never been employed by any component of the starboard press (bar placing some occasional pieces). David Brooks hasn’t been so employed in 18 years. Stephens did have long history with The Wall Street Journal, whose editorial page is starboard; he hasn’t worked there in five years. (The rap on Stephens is that the United States is merely a host country to him). These guys are shills. Even so, I doubt you’re going to get a defense of Roe v. Wade out of Douthat’s pen.

  63. Will chamberlain has another candidate, a breyer clerk elizabeth deutsch she has a masters in gender? She wrote law notes on abortion was an aclu fellow on the topic clerked for far left judge pillard and married a post reporter isaac arnstoff who used to share a byline with josh gerstein at politico

    Sort of reminds me of an article I saw some years ago teasing out the familial and amatory relationships between members of the national press corps and Obama Administration officials. The moral was that the people covering the White House are covering their own relatives.

  65. That law clerk does look like a possible suspect, and it had occurred to me that a Breyer clerk would be in a good position to do this, with the assignment ending at his retirement.

    The Court Marshal will need evidence to prove either one of these, or someone else, is actually the leaker.

  67. Indeed. I listen to the “Bill Walton Show” podcast, where he had a couple of conservative lawyer/activists on a couple of months ago. They were all in on “send it back to the states” as the justification for overturning Roe, but then turned around and said that as soon as it was overturned they were going to try to get an abortion ban written into federal legislation.

    The only podcast in the last 18 months which bears a resemblance to your description is episode 170: “Ethics at the Heart of Public Policy”, broadcast on 1 February 2022. The two guests were Ryan Anderson and Roger Severino. Ryan Anderson (who is a philosopher, not a lawyer) suggests (without offering specifics) that federal measures might supplement state legislation. Severino, who actually is a lawyer, did not contend with him on the point but did not suggest this. Anderson offers a line of reasoning that has been bruited about for decades and of which pro-life lawyers are generally quite skeptical.

  68. I stand corrected, apparently he was pushing the two minute hate on ginni thomas, which came out of nowhere, seemingly,

  69. This would be a winning message, I think – so naturally it will be the last thing the Republicans will do. They’ll probably go all ‘Shouter Baptist’ all over the country, thump their Bibles on ‘God’s Innocent Victims’ and alienate many of their voters.

    Aggie evidently thinks Bitc* McConnell is an evangelical militant.

  70. I don’t care about the leaker’s identity. All the offended rhetoric from the conservative legal community seems pompous and beside the point.

    I am having a hard time believing this will not annihilate the Republican chances of taking back the houses in November and the presidency in 2024.

    The assumption that voters won’t really care about this seems just really dumb to me.

    Maybe I’m dumb … hope so.

  71. your concern is deeply appreciated, surely, people are having trouble scrounging for food and fuel and we’re moving to world war 3, move along,

  72. Jeanne,

    I haven’t read the decision yet but this is supposedly a quote from it:

    We do not pretend to know how our political system or society will respond to today’s decision overruling Roe and Casey. And even if we could foresee what will happen, we would have no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision. We can only do our job, which is to interpret the law, apply longstanding principles of stare decisis, and decide this case accordingly.

  73. I am having a hard time believing this will not annihilate the Republican chances of taking back the houses in November and the presidency in 2024.

    Only someone who believes abortion is that important of an issue can possibly believe that. For most Americans, food prices, gas prices, inflation, the southern border and Covid lunacy still hold sway. This isn’t going to do squat to Republicans – they’re going to win or lose on their own merit.

  74. We don’t know who the leaker is, so this is pure speculation: there is no group of individuals in the world that are more likely to think they have special privileges than high caste Indians. I saw it over and over again in business. Look at Silicon Valley and see it in action every day.

  75. I am having a hard time believing this will not annihilate the Republican chances of taking back the houses in November and the presidency in 2024.

    You associate with cheesy people.

  76. I am having a hard time believing this will not annihilate the Republican chances of taking back the houses in November and the presidency in 2024.

    It is a risk that should be taken seriously, but Callahan is correct. Polls over the last year and prior to this week showed that Abortion was not a top ten concern to voters. The polls will certainly change, but they just need to stay the course to win.

    Roe being overturned begins with the left bringing a lawsuit that they expected to lose because of the new make-up of the court. They did this while most Americans didn’t worry about sufficient access to abortion or whether it existed or not. Overturning Roe doesn’t change the situation in any state and it sure as hell won’t lower inflation or rising energy prices. And let’s not forget that for those for whom abortion matters; this is still a thing: Why Are Fewer Young Adults Having Casual Sex?

  77. From what comments more knowledgeable about the SC than me say this breech is dire. Any pre verdict that can be leaked to the Democrats Propaganda Ministry will be a tampered verdict. And will if no consequences are happen it will happen again and the horse races begin on every case.
    The perpetrator needs to be arrested or just hung in front of the Courthouse

  79. Concerning the supposed leaker, Amit. When people online pondered who did it, some said it was probably a clerk from one of the liberal justices. It made sense. I pictured an Ivy League educated Millennial, Type A and a gunner, whose temperament and attitude was that of your average, college educated liberal you’d find these days – a loose cannon when he doesn’t get his way and snotty when the cameras aren’t looking. Then Amit’s pic and background appeared. If true, go figure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑