Supreme Court has failed to find leaker

WASHINGTON >> The Supreme Court said Thursday an eightmonth investigation that included more than 120 interviews and revealed shortcomings in how sensitive documents are secured has failed to find who leaked a draft of the court's opinion overturning abortion rights.

Ninety-seven employees, including the justices' law clerks, swore under oath that they did not disclose a draft of Justice Samuel Alito's opinion that overturned Roe v. Wade, the court said.

It was unclear whether the justices themselves were questioned about the leak, which was the first time an entire opinion made its way to the public before the court was ready to announce it.

Politico published its explosive leak detailing the Alito draft in early May. Chief Justice John Roberts ordered an investigation the next day into what he termed an “egregious breach of trust.”

On Thursday, the court said its investigative team “has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence.”

The investigation has not come to an end, the court said. A few inquiries and the analysis of some electronic data remain.

The court said it could not rule out that the opinion was inadvertently disclosed, “for example, by being left in a public space either inside or outside the building.”

While not identifying the leaker, the investigation turned up problems in the court's internal practices, some of which were exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic and the shift to working from home.

Too many people have access to sensitive information, the court's policies on information security are outdated and, in some cases, employees acknowledged revealing confidential information to their spouses. It was not clear from the report whether investigators talked to the justices' spouses.

Some employees had to acknowledge in their written statements that they “admitted to telling their spouses about the draft opinion or vote count,” the report said.

Investigators looked closely at connections between court employees and reporters, and they found nothing to substantiate rampant speculation on social media about the identity of the leaker.

Roberts also asked former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, himself a onetime federal judge, to assess the investigation.

Chertoff, in a statement issued through the court, described it as thorough.

Politico published the draft decision on May 2. Less than 24 hours later, Roberts confirmed the draft's authenticity and said he had directed the court's marshal, former Army Col. Gail Curley, to lead the investigation.

Since then, there had been silence from the court — until Thursday.