Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 7:04 am Only 36 clerks & limited # of draft copies. Shouldn’t be too hard for the FBI to come up with the leaker.

Supreme Court investigation fails to identify leaker of Dobbs draft decision

Investigators interviewed more than 120 interviews of nearly 100 employees — all of whom denied disclosing the opinion, the court said.

Sources told Fox News over the summer that the initial focus was on some three dozen law clerks who work directly with the justices. Those clerks were asked to turn over their phones.

Per the Marshal’s report, the investigation team has been "unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence."

"The investigation has determined that it is unlikely that the Court's information technology (IT) systems were improperly accessed by a person outside the Court," the report says. "After examining the Court's computer devices, networks, printers, and available call and text logs, investigators have found no forensic evidence who disclosed the draft opinion."

The report notes that the Court's internal IT system was more vulnerable with more people working from home because of the coronavirus pandemic.

"The pandemic and resulting expansion of the ability to work from home, as well as gaps in the Court's security policies, created an environment where it was too easy to remove sensitive information from the building and the Court's IT networks, increasing the risk of both deliberate and accidental disclosures of Court-sensitive information," the report says.

The Law Clerk Code of Conduct expressly prohibits clerks from discussing the work of the Court. It states that the "temptation to discuss interesting pending or decided cases among friends, spouses, or other family members … must be scrupulously resisted."

However, the Marshall's report notes that a few of those interviewed during the investigation admitted to having told their spouse or partner about the draft Dobbs opinion in violation of the Court's confidentiality rules. Some personnel, the report adds, handled the Dobbs draft "in ways that deviated from their standard process for handling draft opinions."

"The Court investigators will continue following up on leads if more information is learned," said Michael Chertoff, former DHS secretary and a former federal appeals judge brought on by Roberts as a consultant on the court's internal investigative methods. "In the meantime, the Court has already taken steps to increase security and tighten controls regarding the handling of sensitive documents.

"Most significantly, the Chief Justice has also directed a comprehensive review of the Court's information and document security protocols to mitigate the risk of future incidents."

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:02 pm

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 7:04 am Only 36 clerks & limited # of draft copies. Shouldn’t be too hard for the FBI to come up with the leaker.

Well, apparently the FBI didn't handle the investigation.

Supreme Court investigation fails to identify leaker of Dobbs draft decision

Investigators interviewed more than 120 interviews of nearly 100 employees — all of whom denied disclosing the opinion, the court said.

Sources told Fox News over the summer that the initial focus was on some three dozen law clerks who work directly with the justices. Those clerks were asked to turn over their phones.

Per the Marshal’s report, the investigation team has been "unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence."

"The investigation has determined that it is unlikely that the Court's information technology (IT) systems were improperly accessed by a person outside the Court," the report says. "After examining the Court's computer devices, networks, printers, and available call and text logs, investigators have found no forensic evidence who disclosed the draft opinion."

The report notes that the Court's internal IT system was more vulnerable with more people working from home because of the coronavirus pandemic.

"The pandemic and resulting expansion of the ability to work from home, as well as gaps in the Court's security policies, created an environment where it was too easy to remove sensitive information from the building and the Court's IT networks, increasing the risk of both deliberate and accidental disclosures of Court-sensitive information," the report says.

The Law Clerk Code of Conduct expressly prohibits clerks from discussing the work of the Court. It states that the "temptation to discuss interesting pending or decided cases among friends, spouses, or other family members … must be scrupulously resisted."

However, the Marshall's report notes that a few of those interviewed during the investigation admitted to having told their spouse or partner about the draft Dobbs opinion in violation of the Court's confidentiality rules. Some personnel, the report adds, handled the Dobbs draft "in ways that deviated from their standard process for handling draft opinions."

"The Court investigators will continue following up on leads if more information is learned," said Michael Chertoff, former DHS secretary and a former federal appeals judge brought on by Roberts as a consultant on the court's internal investigative methods. "In the meantime, the Court has already taken steps to increase security and tighten controls regarding the handling of sensitive documents.

"Most significantly, the Chief Justice has also directed a comprehensive review of the Court's information and document security protocols to mitigate the risk of future incidents."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/suprem ... t-decision
The bolded is probably how it got leaked...

kalm wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:16 pm

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:02 pm
Well, apparently the FBI didn't handle the investigation.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/suprem ... t-decision
The bolded is probably how it got leaked...

Or one of the justices leaked it.

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:02 pm

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 7:04 am Only 36 clerks & limited # of draft copies. Shouldn’t be too hard for the FBI to come up with the leaker.

Well, apparently the FBI didn't handle the investigation.

Supreme Court investigation fails to identify leaker of Dobbs draft decision

Investigators interviewed more than 120 interviews of nearly 100 employees — all of whom denied disclosing the opinion, the court said.

Sources told Fox News over the summer that the initial focus was on some three dozen law clerks who work directly with the justices. Those clerks were asked to turn over their phones.

Per the Marshal’s report, the investigation team has been "unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence."

"The investigation has determined that it is unlikely that the Court's information technology (IT) systems were improperly accessed by a person outside the Court," the report says. "After examining the Court's computer devices, networks, printers, and available call and text logs, investigators have found no forensic evidence who disclosed the draft opinion."

The report notes that the Court's internal IT system was more vulnerable with more people working from home because of the coronavirus pandemic.

"The pandemic and resulting expansion of the ability to work from home, as well as gaps in the Court's security policies, created an environment where it was too easy to remove sensitive information from the building and the Court's IT networks, increasing the risk of both deliberate and accidental disclosures of Court-sensitive information," the report says.

The Law Clerk Code of Conduct expressly prohibits clerks from discussing the work of the Court. It states that the "temptation to discuss interesting pending or decided cases among friends, spouses, or other family members … must be scrupulously resisted."

However, the Marshall's report notes that a few of those interviewed during the investigation admitted to having told their spouse or partner about the draft Dobbs opinion in violation of the Court's confidentiality rules. Some personnel, the report adds, handled the Dobbs draft "in ways that deviated from their standard process for handling draft opinions."

"The Court investigators will continue following up on leads if more information is learned," said Michael Chertoff, former DHS secretary and a former federal appeals judge brought on by Roberts as a consultant on the court's internal investigative methods. "In the meantime, the Court has already taken steps to increase security and tighten controls regarding the handling of sensitive documents.

"Most significantly, the Chief Justice has also directed a comprehensive review of the Court's information and document security protocols to mitigate the risk of future incidents."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/suprem ... t-decision
The bolded is probably how it got leaked...

UNI88 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 5:28 pm

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:02 pm
Well, apparently the FBI didn't handle the investigation.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/suprem ... t-decision
The bolded is probably how it got leaked...

trump told a waiter at the White House that he wanted Alito's draft declassified before he left office so Boom! it was automatically declassified and not against the law to disseminate.

- or -

My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with a girl who saw Justice Alito hand the draft to Ginny Thomas who turned it over to a reporter from Politico.

kalm wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 5:59 pm

UNI88 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 5:28 pm

trump told a waiter at the White House that he wanted Alito's draft declassified before he left office so Boom! it was automatically declassified and not against the law to disseminate.

- or -

My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with a girl who saw Justice Alito hand the draft to Ginny Thomas who turned it over to a reporter from Politico.

So you guess it’s pretty serious?

kalm wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:16 pm

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:02 pm
Well, apparently the FBI didn't handle the investigation.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/suprem ... t-decision
The bolded is probably how it got leaked...

Or one of the justices leaked it.

UNI88 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 6:43 pm

kalm wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 5:59 pm

So you guess it’s pretty serious?

Yes, I do Mr. Lorensax.

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 5:01 pm

kalm wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:16 pm

Or one of the justices leaked it.

I doubt that.