A leaked draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito aimed to do precisely that, declaring that “Roe and Casey must be overruled,” referring to the original 1973 case that established a constitutional right to get an abortion, and 1992’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which maintained that right.
Monday was the second time the Supreme Court issued opinions since Politico published the leaked draft opinion. The leak sparked demonstrations by pro-choice activists, both in front of the Supreme Court building and outside the private houses of Republican-appointed justices.
WATCH: BILL MAHER GUEST: MAGA IS "ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM"
An announcement issued by Chief Justice John Roberts the day after the draft was made public called the leak a “betrayal of the confidences of the Court” and announced, “The work of the Court will not be affected in any way.”
The court seems to be holding to that announcement. Typically, opinions in the most high-profile cases come out in the final weeks of the court’s term in June or July. By not ruling on Dobbs in the weeks instantly following the leaked draft, the justices reveal that they are not in a hurry to break that tradition, even with the protests.
WATCH: RFK JR. TALKS ABOUT ELON RELEASING TWITTER FILES REVEALING COLLUSION
Roberts said that he had urged the Marshal of the Court to investigate the leak and find its sources. The announcement was included in a press release from the court that made clear that the court’s members “circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court’s confidential deliberative work” and that “it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.”
POLITICAL CORRUPTION TRIAL TAKES BIZARRE TURN: MENENDEZ ENLISTS EXPERT LINKED TO CHILD MURDER CASE
PA Department of Homeland Security memo dated May 13 reported by Axios detailed continuous investigations into threats to “burn down or storm” the Supreme Court building. It showed that the protests outside Conservative justices’ houses "are likely to persist and may increase leading up to and following the issuing of the Court’s official ruling.”
THE DISTURBING SECRETS OF 'GOD'S MISFITS' UNCOVERED IN OKLAHOMA DOUBLE HOMICIDE CASE
The Supreme Court announced on Monday that state prisoners might not present new evidence in federal court in support of an allegation that their post-conviction counsel in state court was ineffective in violation of the Constitution, according to CNN.
CALIFORNIA'S NEW 'GENEALOGY OFFICE' TO HAND OUT CHECKS BASED ON DNA RESULTS
The ruling is a significant defeat for two inmates on death row who announced they had compelling allegations that their state lawyers failed to pursue.
POLITICAL GENIUS OR DESPERATE MOVE? EX-REP. SANTOS REVEALS MASTER PLAN
It will make it harder for inmates across the nation to prevail on allegations that they received ineffective counsel at the state court level in post-conviction proceedings.
The 6-3 opinion was penned by Justice Clarence Thomas.
Discover alternative ideas that will make you think
Engage in mind bending debate
Earn points, rise in rank, have fun
