Does The U.S. Supreme Court Endorse A Two-Tier System Of Justice?

The investigation of the leak of the draft of U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade focused on law clerks and workers, not the Justices.

The U.S. Supreme Court is not a democratic institution per se but it exists in the context of a democracy where, according to the Declaration of Independence, all people are created equal.

The investigation by the Marshal of the Court of the leak last year of the U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade seems more appropriate for a monarchy with a class system where some people are more equal than others.

In these fractious times, what possible justification could Marshal of the Court Gail Curley have for interrogating law clerks and seizing their phones, while effectively treating the justices (and their spouses) as if they were above suspicion?

The Marshal released a 20-page report last week stating it had interviewed “97 employees, all of whom denied disclosing the opinion.” (Emphasis supplied)

Chief Justice John Roberts last year called upon the Curley to investigate and find the source of the leak of the draft opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization to Politico.

The investigation clearly focused on law clerks, who sign confidentiality agreements. They were told to sign an affidavit professing their innocence under penalty of dismissal. Some admitted to telling their spouses about the opinion in violation of the clerks’ code of conduct.

One can only imagine the terrifying ordeal this represented to the clerks, almost all recent law school graduates from Harvard and Yale, who were confronting America’s system of justice for the first time as suspects.

What about the Justices?

A day after the report was released, Curley said the Justices were interviewed as part of the investigation. But an interview is qualitatively different from an interrogation and the justices were not asked to turn over their phones or sign sworn affidavits.