CNN —
The Supreme Court issued an investigative report Thursday, saying it had not yet determined who leaked a draft opinion that struck down Roe v. Wade last year.
In a statement, the court said the investigation team “to date has not been able to identify a responsible person by preponderance of evidence”. It is also unlikely that the leak was the result of computer hacking, the statement said.
Investigators said they conducted 126 formal interviews with 97 employees, all of whom declined to comment.
The leak — the most serious privacy breach in the court’s history — became public on May 2 when Politico published a draft opinion overturning the landmark 1973 decision that established a constitutional right to abortion. The revelation rocked the court and left some judges feeling paranoid within the marble-lined corridors. Shortly thereafter, on May 3, Chief Justice John Roberts issued a statement ordering the sheriff of the court, Gail Curley, to investigate the leak.
Curley oversees about 260 officers, including the court’s police department, which has the power to arrest people on the grounds.
In Thursday’s report, Curley concluded that “regardless of whether an individual is identified or not,” the court should implement better policies regarding sensitive information.
“Over time, continued investigation and analysis may lead to additional leads that could identify the source of the disclosure,” Curley said. “Whether or not any individual is ever identified as the source of the disclosure, the Court must take action to create and implement better policies to manage the handling of Court-sensitive information and determine the best IT security and cooperation systems.”
During an appearance in Atlanta later in May, Roberts called the leak “absolutely appalling.” Justice Elena Kagan later called it a “blatant, flagrant violation of the court’s rules” and Justice Clarence Thomas equated it to “infidelity.”
The report concluded that it was unlikely that the leak was the result of hacking of the High Court’s IT systems.
“The Court’s IT department found no indication of a hack, but continues to monitor and audit the system for any indicators of compromise or penetration of the Court’s IT infrastructure,” the report said, adding that investigators also found no evidence that an employee who has special IT access privileges accesses or moves the project site.
Information investigators obtained from the court’s IT system was used to identify persons of interest and led to “multiple interviews with certain staff,” the report said.
While investigators found that some employees emailed the draft opinion to other employees with approval, “no evidence was found that anyone emailed the draft opinion to anyone else, although technical limitations in the Court’s computer archiving at the time made it impossible to rule that out entirely.”
The court’s system lacked “substantial logging and search functions,” the report noted, hampering investigators’ ability to analyze IT logs.
On June 24, the opinion, which closely monitors the project, was officially released – changing the landscape of women’s reproductive health across the country. The ruling opened the door for states to ban abortion entirely with limited exceptions. According to the Guttmacher Institute, as of December 2022, abortion is not available in 14 states, and courts have temporarily blocked the bans in eight others. Even in states where abortion is available, however, clinics are overwhelmed by an influx of patients from other states.
The opinion was written by Justice Samuel Alito and was joined by Justices Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Cavanaugh.
CNN’s Joan Biskupik exclusively reported that Curley’s team asked law enforcement officials for a year to hand over cell phone records and sign affidavits related to possible disclosure of leaks, and is requested electronic devices from some permanent staff who work with the judges.
But by mid-summer, as is normal practice, most of the clerks who had served during the mandate had moved on to new jobs after completing their clerkships.
The opinion sparked nationwide protests and a man was arrested near Cavanaugh’s home and later charged with attempted murder. Critics charged that the institution was irretrievably tainted by politics.
The court had previously remained silent on the investigation, choosing not to release any official updates.
This story has been updated with additional details.
Add Comment