Quote

ASHINGTON, Nov 19 (Reuters) - A New York Times report of a former anti-abortion leader's claim that he was told in advance about the outcome of a major 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case involving contraceptives triggered calls on Saturday for an investigation of a court still reeling from the leak of a landmark abortion rights ruling.

Rev. Rob Schenck was quoted by The Times as saying he was informed weeks before the public announcement of the 2014 ruling shortly after two conservative allies had dinner at the home of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and his wife.

Alito wrote that majority opinion as well as a recent one overturning the Roe v. Wade decision that had legalized abortion nationwide, both of which were victories for the religious right.

Schenck, who used to lead an evangelical nonprofit in Washington, said in a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts and in interviews with The Times that he was informed ahead of time about the ruling of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, a case involving contraception and religious rights, the newspaper said. Read more https://www.reuters.com/world/us/report-second-major-us-supreme-court-leak-draws-calls-probe-2022-11-19/

What say thee?

Abortion is a private matter. Sad thing if done, but sometimes it is required to save a woman's life. Without abortion, the leading cause of death for women age 50 and under, would be ectopic pregnancy, as it was in the past and is in 3rd world countries in Africa.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ectopic+pregnancy+rate

Quote

Ectopic pregnancy occurs at a rate of 19.7 cases per 1,000 pregnancies in North America and is a leading cause of maternal mortality in the first trimester.

19.7/1000 * 100% = ~ 2 %, one per fifty (if somebody have no math skills)

 (i.e., greater chance of a woman dying of a pregnancy/child than in a fatal car accident in her lifetime)

 

Contraception is also a private matter.

 

The child should have people who want to be parents in the first place. Who are mature and educated enough to teach the child.

 

Edited November 19, 20223 yr by Sensei

!

Moderator Note

The topic is SCOTUS leaks, not the details of the cases.

 

As per swansont, the direction of focus, which should be clear, is the apparent behaviour of Allito/associated others, and slightly more widely, perhaps the effects on judicial fairness/integrity, or not, by the SC judges. Let's keep it tight.

Edited November 19, 20223 yr by StringJunky

2 hours ago, StringJunky said:

What say thee?

It’s currently just hearsay, though almost certainly true IMO and far from surprising. 

It will also almost certainly not lead to any changes or improvements, just a bit of red cheeked embarrassment for the Chief Justice who is already presiding over the least trusted and respected court in many decades. 

2 hours ago, iNow said:

It’s currently just hearsay, though almost certainly true IMO and far from surprising. 

It will also almost certainly not lead to any changes or improvements, just a bit of red cheeked embarrassment for the Chief Justice who is already presiding over the least trusted and respected court in many decades. 

The innate public sense of sanctity/respect in the highest holders of legal office must be looking decidedly grubby for many Americans.

Durbin is right on with his urging Congress to pass a code of ethics for SCOTUS.  Sorely needed.  Leaks, failures to recuse themselves (this means you, Amy and Clarence), spousal influence and conflicts of interest... it's a cesspool atm.