Federal prosecutors are actively conducting a criminal investigation into the source behind the 2022 leak of the Supreme Court decision that overturned federal abortion rights.
asserted
that → conduct → rights
The Justice Department has accelerated its inquiry in recent weeks, The New York Times reported.
asserted
Times → accelerate → weeks
Prosecutors have issued grand jury subpoenas for testimony and requested information from people employed by the high court when the draft opinion was disclosed.
asserted
opinion → issue → court
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, headed by Trump appointee Jeanine Pirro, is managing the investigation.
asserted
Office → head → investigation
Pirro, working with career prosecutors, assigned senior prosecutor Carlton Davis to the matter.
asserted
Pirro → work → matter
Davis previously handled local fraud and violence prosecutions, as well as an unsuccessful effort to indict six Democratic lawmakers who had advised military personnel about refusing unlawful orders.
asserted
who → handle → orders
The public identification of the person who leaked Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.’s draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to Politico in May 2022 — two months before its formal release — has remained elusive.
uncertain
who → leak → release
Following the breach, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. initiated an internal review.
asserted
Jr. → follow → review
Court investigators interviewed 97 personnel, including clerks and staff members who submitted signed affidavits, though justices were consulted without formal interviews.
asserted
justices → interview → interviews
In January 2023, the court’s top security official issued a report concluding that the culprit could not be identified under a “preponderance” of the evidence standard.
uncertain
culprit → issue → standard
The report cited outdated security protocols while noting that online claims targeting liberal law clerks were unproven.
uncertain
claims → cite → clerks
Months later, Alito told The Wall Street Journal that he had “a pretty good idea who is responsible” but lacked sufficient evidence to name the person publicly.
asserted
who → tell → person
Conservative commentators and President Donald Trump have repeatedly urged law enforcement to uncover the source, operating on the theory that a liberal staffer released the document to derail the draft ruling.
asserted
staffer → urge → ruling
“That person should be found,” Trump said in July.
asserted
Trump → find → July
Other observers suggested a conservative may have leaked the draft to prevent justices from departing from the majority opinion, noting that internal efforts to reach a compromise had been underway prior to the publication.
Former F.B.I. official Dan Bongino confirmed in a May 2025 social media post that the administration was continuing to track the leaker.
uncertain
administration → suggest → leaker
Members of the court have also expressed support for identifying the source.
asserted
Members → express → source
“We will pursue it till the end,” Justice Elena Kagan told Congress during testimony in July, where Justice Amy Coney Barrett also described leaks of certain court materials as illegal.
asserted
Barrett → pursue → materials
Legal experts noted that pursuing criminal charges presents distinct statutory and constitutional hurdles.
asserted
pursuing → note → hurdles
Unlike national security cases involving classified information, no specific federal statute explicitly criminalizes the unauthorized disclosure of internal Supreme Court drafts.
asserted
statute → involve → drafts
Prosecutors could potentially explore broader charges, such as theft of government property, unauthorized disclosure of confidential government data or false statements made to investigators during the court’s initial 2023 inquiry.
uncertain
Prosecutors → explore → inquiry
Additionally, some relevant federal statutes carry a five-year statute of limitations that expires in spring 2027.
asserted
that → carry → spring
Any formal steps to subpoena internal court communications or interview personnel could raise constitutional separation-of-powers issues regarding executive branch oversight of the judiciary.
uncertain
steps → subpoena → judiciary
“Once again, the Trump Justice Department has created questions about whether there are precedents when there are no precedents,” Samuel W. Buell, a law professor at Duke University and former federal prosecutor, told The New York Times.
asserted
Buell → create → Times
Michael C. Dorf, a constitutional law professor at Cornell, told The New York Times that while the Justice Department could investigate federal crimes occurring on court property, an inquiry lacking an underlying criminal violation risked crossing into “the executive branch harassing members of the judicial branch.”
uncertain
inquiry → tell → branch
Several law clerks who served conservative justices at the time of the leak currently hold positions within the executive branch, including T. Elliot Gaiser, a former clerk for Justice Alito who now leads the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
asserted
who → serve → Counsel
The Aporia
