Orin Kerr seems to be focusing on legal criminality with respect to the leak ... completely missing the point. Whether the leaker is right or left leaning ... should never work again in the legal profession.
I read earlier today (of course I can't find it now) that the Roe leak was deemed a "breach of trust" by the newspaper with whom the clerk had shared the info (supposedly on the promise of not publishing early) and therefore akin to negligence rather than malice, so his boss elected not to fire him.
That's correct. In fact, Justice Lewis Powell (for whom the clerk worked) was OK with the leak, which was designed to let Time have the decision (which was supposed to be announced at 10 AM Friday) in its issue that published in the afternoon that Friday, because the issue had to be finalized an hour before the announcement. But, due to various complications, the Court didn't announce the decision until late in the day Friday. When Time came out earlier that afternoon with the decision, then-CJ Warren Burger publicly said that he'd fire the leaker, but Powell talked him out of it.
Two additional musings: i) poking around global abortion practice - interestingly enough 15 week windows for abortion seems actually more the rule than the exception for a # of EU countries and ii) procedural question - I wonder if Jackson’s Women’s health can withdraw from the case and prevent a ruling?
I had a similar experience to yours re the range of state abortion laws. Immediately wanted to just check the practical impact. The “near total ban” threw me. I was a bit suspicious but didn’t have the time to dig further and you beat me to it. Interestingly enough … it seems virtually 98% of abortions occur in … the first 20 weeks according to this Mother Jones 2019 piece - this renders the characterization of near total ban as verging on … deceptive at best. https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/04/raw-data-abortions-by-week-of-pregnancy/. That said I am sure some red states will go all in with total bans.
Orin Kerr seems to be focusing on legal criminality with respect to the leak ... completely missing the point. Whether the leaker is right or left leaning ... should never work again in the legal profession.
I read earlier today (of course I can't find it now) that the Roe leak was deemed a "breach of trust" by the newspaper with whom the clerk had shared the info (supposedly on the promise of not publishing early) and therefore akin to negligence rather than malice, so his boss elected not to fire him.
That's correct. In fact, Justice Lewis Powell (for whom the clerk worked) was OK with the leak, which was designed to let Time have the decision (which was supposed to be announced at 10 AM Friday) in its issue that published in the afternoon that Friday, because the issue had to be finalized an hour before the announcement. But, due to various complications, the Court didn't announce the decision until late in the day Friday. When Time came out earlier that afternoon with the decision, then-CJ Warren Burger publicly said that he'd fire the leaker, but Powell talked him out of it.
Two additional musings: i) poking around global abortion practice - interestingly enough 15 week windows for abortion seems actually more the rule than the exception for a # of EU countries and ii) procedural question - I wonder if Jackson’s Women’s health can withdraw from the case and prevent a ruling?
I had a similar experience to yours re the range of state abortion laws. Immediately wanted to just check the practical impact. The “near total ban” threw me. I was a bit suspicious but didn’t have the time to dig further and you beat me to it. Interestingly enough … it seems virtually 98% of abortions occur in … the first 20 weeks according to this Mother Jones 2019 piece - this renders the characterization of near total ban as verging on … deceptive at best. https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/04/raw-data-abortions-by-week-of-pregnancy/. That said I am sure some red states will go all in with total bans.