5 ms·

Don't you think it was for money? A law clerk would be risking their entire career for this, and I can't imagine they would do that just to get the news out ear

by magpi3 4y ago

Don't you think it was for money? A law clerk would be risking their entire career for this, and I can't imagine they would do that just to get the news out early. I wonder if politico will acknowledge whether or not they paid for the leak.

showerst 4y ago
I’m doubtful of that; politico lives and dies on having friends in government willing to break things (whether by leaks or just telling their reporters public facts first). Looking like a tabloid has only downside for politico — either people will start to want money for scoops, or they’ll get cut off.
jimmygrapes 4y ago
I'd venture it was deemed "worth it" just like the absurd amount of leaks just after Jan 20, 2017. In this case, it's possible that an intentional leak of a draft is aimed to encourage politicians and activists alike to ~~threaten~~encourage various Justices to change their minds before the final decision, ala ACA/Roberts
- fundad 4y ago
  This could just as likely to be to distract from something petty but embarrassing about to drop.
  - sjg007 4y ago
    Maybe something about the Thomas’s …
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > There's a third possibility, which might be most plausible: Roberts is doing his institutionalist best to court Kavanaugh and/or Barrett away from a full overrule of Roe and someone wants to deter that defection by documenting that they both initially voted to end it. https://twitter.com/stevenmazie/status/1521298950011207680 https://twitter.com/stevenmazie/status/1521298950011207680
theoldlove 4y ago
No one does anything relating to Roe purely for the money. Whatever the reason for this leak, it was (at least in part) motivated by principle.
- fundad 4y ago
elliekelly 4y ago
It could also have been leaked by a sitting Justice in which case the source would have risked nothing at all.
- magpi3 4y ago
  Justices can be impeached. I'm not saying they would be, but it's possible. Why risk it? The opinion is going to come out anyway.
  - boringg 4y ago
    Not in the current political climate - can't get garner the votes to impeach.
  - elliekelly 4y ago
    > Why risk it? Because the opinion can still change. The votes can still change.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  Given the absolute destruction this will wreak on internal institutional trust at the Court, there is only one sitting Justice that would really risk nothing at all by leaking it.
  - loeg 4y ago
    Barrett?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - remarkEon 4y ago
      I’m assuming dragonwriter means Breyer, who is retiring after this term. Having followed the court for over a decade I’d been genuinely shocked if it was him.
- 4y ago
StanislavPetrov 4y ago
>Don't you think it was for money? A law clerk would be risking their entire career for this, and I can't imagine they would do that just to get the news out early. We can only speculate until (unless?) the details come out. It certainly could be for the money. On a hot potato political issue like this, someone who is seen as "helping the cause" could easily make millions from a Gofundme or a book deal. There is also the social capital to be gained among those who would view this person's "sacrifice" as heroic. And of course there are always true believers like Reality Winner who are blinded by ideology and fail to consider the potential consequences of their actions.
cudgy 4y ago
Such clerk would be heralded as a hero by many in the far left. They will write a book about it and make millions. Oh and get a show on a liberal network or at least be paid handsomely as a contributor. Perhaps I’m being too cynical.
PolygonSheep 4y ago
> A law clerk would be risking their entire career for this I see two likely outcomes here: 1) The leaker is not publicly identified and their career goes along as well as it would have had they not leaked. 2) The leaker is identified. They lose their clerkship but the leak will end up pleasing about half the country and they get a really nice job with some ideologically aligned law firm/NGO, a book deal, and a lucrative speaking career as the one who bravely risked their job to save the right to abortion.

by magpi3 4y ago

showerst 4y ago

I’m doubtful of that; politico lives and dies on having friends in government willing to break things (whether by leaks or just telling their reporters public facts first). Looking like a tabloid has only downside for politico — either people will start to want money for scoops, or they’ll get cut off.

jimmygrapes 4y ago

I'd venture it was deemed "worth it" just like the absurd amount of leaks just after Jan 20, 2017. In this case, it's possible that an intentional leak of a draft is aimed to encourage politicians and activists alike to ~~threaten~~encourage various Justices to change their minds before the final decision, ala ACA/Roberts

fundad 4y ago
This could just as likely to be to distract from something petty but embarrassing about to drop.
- sjg007 4y ago
  Maybe something about the Thomas’s …
ceejayoz 4y ago
> There's a third possibility, which might be most plausible: Roberts is doing his institutionalist best to court Kavanaugh and/or Barrett away from a full overrule of Roe and someone wants to deter that defection by documenting that they both initially voted to end it. https://twitter.com/stevenmazie/status/1521298950011207680 https://twitter.com/stevenmazie/status/1521298950011207680

theoldlove 4y ago

No one does anything relating to Roe purely for the money. Whatever the reason for this leak, it was (at least in part) motivated by principle.

fundad 4y ago

elliekelly 4y ago

It could also have been leaked by a sitting Justice in which case the source would have risked nothing at all.

magpi3 4y ago
Justices can be impeached. I'm not saying they would be, but it's possible. Why risk it? The opinion is going to come out anyway.
- boringg 4y ago
  Not in the current political climate - can't get garner the votes to impeach.
- elliekelly 4y ago
  > Why risk it? Because the opinion can still change. The votes can still change.
dragonwriter 4y ago
Given the absolute destruction this will wreak on internal institutional trust at the Court, there is only one sitting Justice that would really risk nothing at all by leaking it.
- loeg 4y ago
  Barrett?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - remarkEon 4y ago
    I’m assuming dragonwriter means Breyer, who is retiring after this term. Having followed the court for over a decade I’d been genuinely shocked if it was him.
4y ago

StanislavPetrov 4y ago

>Don't you think it was for money? A law clerk would be risking their entire career for this, and I can't imagine they would do that just to get the news out early. We can only speculate until (unless?) the details come out. It certainly could be for the money. On a hot potato political issue like this, someone who is seen as "helping the cause" could easily make millions from a Gofundme or a book deal. There is also the social capital to be gained among those who would view this person's "sacrifice" as heroic. And of course there are always true believers like Reality Winner who are blinded by ideology and fail to consider the potential consequences of their actions.

cudgy 4y ago

Such clerk would be heralded as a hero by many in the far left. They will write a book about it and make millions. Oh and get a show on a liberal network or at least be paid handsomely as a contributor. Perhaps I’m being too cynical.

PolygonSheep 4y ago

> A law clerk would be risking their entire career for this I see two likely outcomes here: 1) The leaker is not publicly identified and their career goes along as well as it would have had they not leaked. 2) The leaker is identified. They lose their clerkship but the leak will end up pleasing about half the country and they get a really nice job with some ideologically aligned law firm/NGO, a book deal, and a lucrative speaking career as the one who bravely risked their job to save the right to abortion.