Roe Memo Leak

Then we disagree. The only reason I can think of as a motive, is to generate outrage. And I think that, because - surprise - it's precisely what happened.

It is the single most used issue when it comes to opposition to SCOTUS appointments and national elections - that they'll overturn Roe v. Wade. I've been hearing it for at least forty years - do not support this appointment, do not approve this SCOTUS nominee, do not vote for this governor or Senator or President. It's so frequent, it's an expectation during confirmation hearings.

And - it works. As Paul Crewe says in "The Longest Yard" - "Worked once, should work again".
If you want people to act - piss them off, get them afraid.

Conservatives are so used to being let down by conservative SCOTUS members - releasing it to generate animus against a conservative judge? Been there, done that. Happens so often, it wouldn't even make FOX.
Of course the decision was going to generate outrage from the left. The issue is timing, not whether or not to generate outrage.

This was an issue I would think most conservatives were already concerned about heading into the 2022 elections. I know it's something I and most of the conservatives I talked with were concerned about; it was perhaps the most concerning variable. We knew the Dobbs decision would be coming out, likely only about 4 months before the election, and that a decision to overturn Roe would likely significantly harm Republican chances.

The only thing the leak did was move the start of the outrage 7 weeks further from the election. That probably wasn't going to matter a lot, but to the extent it did it wasn't likely to help liberals. From their perspective, the closer to the election the better. The end of June, when the opinion was likely to come out, was going to be quite fortuitous timing.

As for generating animus among conservatives toward a conservative Justice, that's not what I suggested as a possible motivation. The outrage was always going to come from the left unless Justice Kavanaugh changed his vote. If that happened, then yes... there would almost certainly have been considerable outrage from conservatives. How could there not be on an issue this contentious? To have what many had been working for for so long stripped away because a Justice responded to public outrage and changed his vote? Justice Kavanaugh is already getting a bit of a reputation as not being a real conservative based on some of his votes, his name would be mud in a lot of circles if it was made so clear that he actually changed his vote in a case as big as this. For a large portion of the conservative base, this is the case that matters. Getting a Court that would finally overturn Roe v Wade was the whole point of all the work. It was, in some ways, the end game.

But, again, even if we discount the inward-facing possible motivations, the outward-facing motivation you see as the only possible motivation gives the conservative side at least as much reason for the leak. Liberals were going to get their outrage regardless.
 

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
Well THAT was a typo - you just don't know which word to use,



That would be for the courts to decide.


Actually, Nicholas Roske is in jail at the moment.



Elaborate. What law?


You don't get that according to the Constitution, that's where it belongs. You don't get to weight pros and cons of the decision - you decide based on the law. Roe was a horrendous decision and was further exacerbated by attempts to MAKE LAW from the bench. For example, setting restrictions on what could be done per trimester. SCOTUS has no business "making law".

The great thing about it now, is the people of the states actually elect their legislators and they decide what laws there will be.
The PEOPLE OF THE STATE choose. I can't think of anything more fair than the people choosing if they want abortion to be the law or not, by electing their state legislature. AND - they can elect them to overturn it.

A sight more fair than nine persons deciding for you. This way, you have a voice where you didn't have one, before.



Then get out and vote. Vote in school board members. Participate. I don't know how SCOTUS should have anything to say about what your local school teaches.


Who do you think appoints the Supreme Court nominees?

The very people we voted for idiot.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
I don't know who leaked the memo, but I do feel that there is a significant reason they haven't named who it is.
We all know that with the limited amount of people working in a position to have that memo, that they have to know who leaked it.

If it was a Conservative I feel that one of the liberals would have to leak that. No way they could keep their mouths shut about it.
That is what make me feel it was a liberal, and one of the Justices. I could be wrong, of course, but the only way to change my mind is to name the leaker. Easy ,Right?
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
Who do you think appoints the Supreme Court nominees?

The very people we voted for idiot.
(Sigh) Idiot . Yeah.

I’m evidently unable to get you to grasp that SCOTUS doesn’t write laws. Legislatures do. You vote for them. State legislators. THEY can write laws the people want. That’s what they do.

And now back on ignore. Plonk!
 

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
I don't know who leaked the memo, but I do feel that there is a significant reason they haven't named who it is.
We all know that with the limited amount of people working in a position to have that memo, that they have to know who leaked it.

If it was a Conservative I feel that one of the liberals would have to leak that. No way they could keep their mouths shut about it.
That is what make me feel it was a liberal, and one of the Justices. I could be wrong, of course, but the only way to change my mind is to name the leaker. Easy ,Right?


Do you not read any posts and just shout your opinion into the void?

It could be any number of up to 100 people. The leak isn't the issue. It's the judicial activism out of step with the needs and wants of the majority of American's.
 

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
(Sigh) Idiot . Yeah.

I’m evidently unable to get you to grasp that SCOTUS doesn’t write laws. Legislatures do. You vote for them. State legislators. THEY can write laws the people want. That’s what they do.

And now back on ignore. Plonk!


Where did i say they wrote the laws?

I said the SC changed years of settled law using flimsy reasoning out of step with the majority of the countries needs and wants.

Meanwhile two swore that ROE was settled law and they had no intention of changing it during their confirmation hearings.

And we now have learned that at least two members have been violating ethics rules by taken gifts from interested parties.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

So He WAS the Leaker: Justice Breyer Tells Meet the Press He Hoped for 'Compromise' on Dobbs Ruling









Hm.

Interesting.

More from NBC News:

Former Justice Stephen Breyer described the 2022 leak of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade as “unfortunate” and sidestepped questions about whether justices had been working on a compromise ruling behind the scenes.
In an interview with NBC News' "Meet the Press," Breyer didn't say he was upset about the leak while noting that in general he tried to "avoid getting angry" when he was on the bench.

"You try to avoid getting angry or that — you try in the job — you try to remain as calm, reasonable and serious as possible. I think it was unfortunate," he said of the publication of the draft decision in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case.
Asked directly whether the justices had discussed a potential compromise to limit access to abortion at 15 weeks, Breyer told "Meet the Press" moderator Kristen Welker, "Well, you know as much about that as I do."
 
Top