Will the future know what Honor was? — the Supreme Court abortion decision leak

© 2022 Peter Free

 

03 May 2022

 

 

Question

 

Is there an ethical difference between:

 

 

(a) leaking supposed state secrets about government-sponsored murder and Constitution-crushing

 

and

 

 

(b) leaking coming Supreme Court decisions?

 

 

As useless as the American Supreme Court is . . .

 

. . . I was saddened by the following lapse in legal ethics:

 

 

In an unprecedented move, the [coming reversal of Roe v. Wade abortion] opinion was leaked to Politico [see here], presumably in an attempt to create massive social unrest that would lead to one or more of the justices being intimidated into changing their mind.

 

The only people with access to the original document were the nine justices and their 36 law clerks, meaning it’s almost certain that one of the 36 law clerks leaked the document.

 

When you consider that each justice has four clerks working for them, that probably narrows it down to one of 16 clerks working for the four Democrat-appointed justices.

 

“The fact that some are praising this leak shows how utterly craven we have become in our politics,” tweeted attorney Jonathan Turley.

 

“There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage.”

 

© 2022 Tyler Durden, Who Leaked The Supreme Court Opinion?, ZeroHedge (03 May 2022)

 

 

I share Jonathan Turley's disappointment

 

Becoming a Supreme Court law clerk is an inestimable privilege. To trash that by violating the most obvious of ethical considerations — which guard the Court's decision-making privacy and the panel's segregation away from the machinations of the Alleged Mob — seems an immoral and unprofessional step too far to me.

 

 

Perspective

 

This is not equivalent to leaking supposed state secrets that have to do with Government-sponsored murder, surveillance-mongering and Constitution-obliteration.

 

The abortion decision leak does not constitute an ethically defensible (admirable) Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden moment.

 

This Court leak amounts to lowly political squabbling, for its own sake. Regarding an issue that presents an unsolvable moral and societal conundrum to anyone, who fairly and completely considers its implications.

 

There is no legitimate ethical purpose to violating the Court's privacy in this instance.

 

The abortion battle has been raging for decades and will continue to fester for many more. It is not as if the issue has not been well-aired.

 

It is not as if Government's repeated abortion intrusions, interventions and 'orderings' have been performed behind closed doors and without public input. Time is not of the essence.

 

 

The moral? — Human scumbags are running America now

 

How long can personal and professional integrity survive under these conditions?

 

What will be left of Honor?

 

Will anyone in the American future even know what Honor is?