Matt Slovin

Lawyer. Former journalist. Views are my own. Email: [email protected]

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

But we don’t know who leaked them, and NYT does not describe the source of the memos. Will Baude wrote today that “we will have to become skilled at figuring out what these documents really tell us, and what they do not.” They tell us very little about the leaker or their motive.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

We need to be careful about trying to interpret leaks in real time. After the Dobbs leak, many commentators and politicians confidently attributed it to the left. Four years later, we still don’t know who leaked the draft or why.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

The same pattern has played out since NYT’s story on the Justices’ 2016 memos. From Matthew Hennessey's WSJ newsletter: “Ed Whelan ... speculates that the [RBG] estate may have leaked them. Jonathan H. Adler ... thinks he sees the handiwork of a sitting liberal justice.”

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

NEW DRAFT: A draft of my article, "The Dobbs Leak and Judicial Empowerment," has been posted to SSRN. Comments are welcomed. My email address is in my bio.

https://t.co/9FE5VFSvss

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

https://t.co/j4LYxS63nE

[🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 @mrddmia]

The Supreme Court is constitutionally independent from the political branches.

The Court must run the internal investigation, with deputized agents under the Marshal’s control.

Under no scenario should Congress or the Executive Branch insert itself, unless asked by the Court.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

Worth remembering: In the aftermath of the Dobbs leak, conservatives pushed to have the investigation handled internally at SCOTUS, citing separation of powers. Then-AG Garland seemed willing to investigate if asked by the Court but (as far as we know) that ask never came.

[The Washington Post @washingtonpost]

Deputy Director Dan Bongino said the FBI will reexamine the leaked Supreme Court draft decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and the discovery of cocaine at the White House. https://t.co/Wusj162WKz

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

"Dobbs, Deliberative Interference, and Legitimacy" has been published in @arizstlj Vol. 56, Issue 4. The issue is in memory of Justice O'Connor.

I argue that the Dobbs leak's impact on SCOTUS's deliberations undermines the decision's legitimacy. Link: https://t.co/nqRoucmccl

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

@espinsegall And I read the first part of his statement (“We did not discuss the emergency application he filed today”) as leaving open the possibility that they discussed the New York criminal case. It can be read to mean only that they didn’t discuss the literal application.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

The winner of the Bengals-Browns game Sunday should get their stadium project fully funded by the state. No state money for the loser. Who says no?

[Chris Wetterich @ChrisCinciBiz]

Interesting line about the Browns' new $2.4 billion domed palace in suburban Cleveland. "In anticipation of the state coming forward with something close to that $600 million..." https://t.co/D6ZqVEXKaC

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

@andreperrotta13 @TeN I think we want PIT and BUF to win games so that KC doesn't have the bye locked up by the time they play DEN in Week 18.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

@robkelner It does seem as if the Dobbs leak might have emboldened future leakers, but I believe it was unique in its harm because of its content and timing.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

As I argue in my forthcoming article, the Dobbs leak—which influenced ongoing deliberations—is far more harmful to judicial legitimacy than post-decision leaks, which can help the public decide whether to treat judicial decisions as legitimate.

https://t.co/bh20bCLMHb

[Robert Kelner @robkelner]

Unlike the Dobbs opinion leak, this is a torrential downpour of documents and insider accounts. Likely multiple leakers. The damage to the Court is incalculable. We will have a new kind of Court now, one that is aware its every internal move will be scrutinized in real time. It will respond to that development the way humans do, which is not good. The rule of law will suffer.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

Another example of the pressure justices faced over the decades to overturn Roe v. Wade.

I will use this opportunity to re-share my draft article on an instance of pressure that Roe could not survive: the leak of Justice Alito's draft Dobbs opinion.

https://t.co/bh20bCLMHb

[Kannon Shanmugam @KannonShanmugam]

An incredible story here by ⁦@JoanBiskupic⁩ about how close the Supreme Court came to overruling Roe v. Wade… in 1989: https://t.co/wBpsyeJQ81

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

A draft of this article is now available on SSRN: https://t.co/ehF2pq4QL5

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

My article, "Dobbs, Deliberative Interference and Legitimacy," will be published in the Arizona State Law Journal (@ArizStLJ)! Reach out if you would like to see a draft.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

I discuss this in my forthcoming article as an example of pressure on the Court during the Dobbs deliberations.

The threat of violence against justices is horrible, but it was the leak that influenced the Court's decision in Dobbs, not this incident.

[Carrie Severino @JCNSeverino]

Don’t let this be memory-holed:

The draft Dobbs opinion was leaked and it helped inspire an individual to travel to Justice Kavanaugh’s home with a plan to assassinate him to prevent the final ruling.

The threats and intimidation against the Supreme Court have to stop.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

@jesskcoleman Agreed. I'm just suggesting reasons why the discussion might be framed in terms of ethics.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

@jesskcoleman We probably need a new framework. But that invites accusations of bias (even if the guardrails of the new framework are actually more important than those of the existing framework).

Might be easier to just say these are the agreed upon rules, and you aren't playing by them.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

@jesskcoleman I think there's a desire to want to fit current events into existing analytical frameworks (like judicial ethics), and those existing frameworks don't easily take things like "systematic corruption" into account.

[Matt Slovin @MattSlovin]

@jadler1969 @stevenmazie You're wrong. RBG was NOT considering cases from which she might have needed to recuse at the time of her comments. Alito WAS considering a 2020 election case at the time the flag was flown.