According to an analysis by NPR there are no “Democratic-dominated” states that have unenforced anti-abortion laws on the books. However, there are several purple states such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona that have unenforced abortion bans and/or “trigger laws” on their books.
I believe several democratic-dominated states got rid of those laws in the last four years or so.
Some Top Shelf Irony, right here!
Leak on the Orient Express!!
I support your excellent joke but priority recognition protocols require me to point out that SunUp already made it in post #177. 
It’s generally been my opinion that it wasn’t an opponent who did this, because it would be a much better strategy to do so at least a month from now, or just before the official announcement.
That said (and I’m just playing devil’s advocate here), I could imagine Stephen Breyer was the leaker, considering (a) at eighty-three he’s probably ready to retire and possibly has decided to go out with a bang, and (b) Biden still has time to appoint a replacement and have him or her confirmed.
Again, I’m totally speculating here, and I have no reason to think that it would be in Breyer’s character to do something like this.
He’s already been replaced with Ketanji Brown-Jackson
She doesn’t take her seat until the end of this Supreme Court term.
Did you read the post directly above mine that I was responding to? It was suggested that Breyer leaked it because Biden still has time to replace him.
I was replying to that.
I don’t know I if anyone else has come up with this one, but I think a conservative leaked it so the state legislatures would know it was coming, and to signal that the court was going to reverse not just Roe v Wade but privacy rights more broadly. This gives the states time to get laws passed that are ready to go when the ruling is announced. Which they are doing in earnest, apparently.
I think it has Clarence and Ginni Thomas written all over it. How did everyone miss this? Or am I missing something?
ETA: Plus they get to gaslight the libs. Of course it’s them.
What the heck? Justice Breyer has retired, and Biden already appointed a replacement who was confirmed. Unless your post was a whoosh?
Nitpick, he has a month or two left as he is retiring at the start of the summer recess.
Right, but he publicly announced his retirement on 1/27/22. The Chief acknowledged Justice Breyer was hearing his last oral argument on 4/27/22. And his replacement was confirmed back on 4/7/22.
He’s more than “probably ready to retire” while “Biden still has time to appoint a replacement” like the previous poster claimed.
No, not a whoosh, but an error. Apparently the Wiki article needs (or needed) to be updated; surprising after all this time.
My fault for using the term “solicitor-client” to mean the complete compendium of confidentiality duties. In my system (don’t know if it would apply in the US), there’s the solicitor-client privilege, which is specifically an evidentiary privilege, and there’s the broader duty of confidentiality. Both are covered by the colloquial term “solicitor-client privilege”.
The duty of confidentiality is a professional duty, enforced by the law societies. So even if the law clerk isn’t providing legal advice to the judge, in our system the fact of being employed or on contract to the judge would trigger that professional duty of confidentiality. Breach of that duty is equally a matter for a potential complaint to the law society, as a breach of the code of conduct.
So, even if the opinion isn’t covered by sol-client privilege, strictly construed, there would likely be a duty of professional confidentiality, breach of which could expose the leaking clerk to professional discipline.
As stated, I’m just basing my comments on our system up north, and I appreciate it could be different in the States.
(And then, even if not covered by professional duty of confidentiality, there would likely be a third confidentiality restriction, in the contract of employment or articles of clerkship between the judge and the law clerk. A lawyer who consciously breaches a contractual duty of confidentiality in their legal employment may also be in trouble with the law society.)
I am not a lawyer, and I don’t know exactly what the legal requirements are for lawyers to keep confidence in the US. But I do know that keeping confidences is central to what US lawyers do, and that this duty is so important to them that it is protected by the law.
I simply can’t imagine that anyone who hires lawyers would hire one who was known to have leaked confidential information.
Most of the rules relate to client confidences. But 8.4 has some things that might apply:
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
…
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
Completely unscientific, but I’ve taken to asking lawyers I work with or am dealing with if they would hire a clerk who leaked a draft opinion from the court they work with.
So far, it’s 100% « No ». With explanations along the lines of:
« Can’t trust them »;
« they don’t understand the basic requirement of being a lawyer »;
« if they leaked a judge’s opinion, they could leak on you. ».
I rhink the most likely answer is “staff”, and it cpuld be for any reason, even money, if someone paid the leaker than leaked to Politico.
If the overlords controlling the simulation have a sense of narrative, its Ginni Thomas, withoutbher husband’s knowledge.
I definitely think it’s Ginni Thomas, although I wouldn’t be surprised if her husband is in on it, too.
After his little speech about not being bullied, I’m even more convinced, just because doing something like this (the leak) and then using it to smear liberals is just so on point.
Ginni is very active with the Council for National Policy, an innocuous sounding group that is a front for right wing religious radicals….one of the founders was Left Behind author Tim LeHaye. This group, and other groups Ms. Thomas is involved with, have been instrumental in lobbying for and even crafting anti-abortion legislation.
The fact that groups like this and the state legislatures are getting so much benefit from the leak, in the ability to craft and pass legislation that is compliant with the reasoning in the opinion, legislation that will take effect the second the opinion is announced, is what makes her my #1 suspect.