No one leaks from the Supreme Court discussions. If they do, their name will be mud for the remainder of their legal career. They will not be employable anywhere in the legal community, left or right, because they cannot be trusted. Someone is creating a narrative for nefarious reasons. If a new clerk has done so, after all the training and admonitions not to do such a thing, the Court will find out who it is, and they will forfeit their hiring bonus and their career.
You have normalcy bias.
A truly committed leftist does not obey rules, they create new ones for the revolution.
Leftist law clerks are like ants at a picnic.
The leaker would be a mass media icon with a guaranteed future law professor gig at any of a hundred law schools.
Their course: Law and the Fight for the People’s Revolution
Think logically.
Who ever is leaking is doing it with an agenda and/or anonymity, or both.
To risk this, assuming it basically will be soon a done deal, is likely pro-baby-murder, and probably thinks this leak might help throw a monkey wrench into the process to try their best to stop it. However, what they are not contending with: NCSWIC. Nothing. And, that includes taking down Roe.
You have to identify them first. I imagine that draft opinions go through dozens and dozens of hands as it makes its rounds.
What you said only applies in the conservative world, not liberal world.
No one leaks from the Supreme Court discussions. If they do, their name will be mud for the remainder of their legal career.
Historically, it has happened before in a very high profile case. In the famous Dred Scott case, Justice Curtis gave his dissenting opinion to a publisher, and it was published, before the official Opinion of the Court was drafted or issued. The writing of the Opinion of the Court had been assigned to Justice Nelson whose opinion reads like an Opinion of the Majority, but which became his short concurring opinion. In response to what Justice Curtis did, Chief Justice Taney reassigned writing of the Opinion of the Court to himself for the purpose of responding to all the matter brought up by Justice Curtis in his dissent. After the session, Justice Curtis and the Chief Justice engaged in an acrimonious exchange of correspondence. Justice Nelson, then the youngest justice on the Court resigned from the Court.