Supreme Court Investigation Has ‘Small’ Number Of Suspects For Dobbs Leak: REPORT

 The Supreme Court’s investigation into the leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s Dobbs majority opinion has reportedly narrowed down the suspect list, according to The Wall Street Journal.

On May 2, 2022, the majority opinion for the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Center opinion was leaked in an extreme break from precedent, and the following day Chief Justice John Roberts announced that there would be an investigation to find the person responsible for the leak, according to the WSJ. After nine months, the investigation has reportedly limited the pool of potential suspects to a “small” group. 

WASHINGTON, DC – APRIL 23: Members of the Supreme Court pose for a group photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on April 23, 2021. Seated from left: Associate Justice Samuel Alito, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Stephen Breyer and Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Standing from left: Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch and Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett. (Photo by Erin Schaff-Pool/Getty Images)

The Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade, which had prevented states from enacting many abortion restrictions. It was formally released in June.

Some of the remaining individuals in question are law clerks but investigators have not “conclusively” identified anyone, according to the WSJ. Interviews were “short” and “superficial” and included questions such as “Did you do it? Do you know anyone who had a reason to do it?”

Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley was appointed by the Chief Justice the day following the incident to determine the identity of the Dobbs leaker, but the court has released no information since. Following the leak, conservative justices were doxxed and mass protests ensued outside their homes, escalating to an attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Roberts released his annual report earlier this month, emphasizing the difficult year the court had.

“The law requires every judge to swear an oath to perform his or her work without fear or favor, but we must support judges by ensuring their safety,” Roberts wrote. “A judicial system cannot and should not live in fear.”