This is partisan nonsense for a few reasons, but mainly because... > He did it to keep Roberts's vote secure He had no idea how Roberts would eventually vote.

This is partisan nonsense for a few reasons, but mainly because... > He did it to keep Roberts's vote secure He had no idea how Roberts would eventually vote. Robert's been very much a wild-card, so this would be quite the reckless gamble. Further, generally speaking, SCOTUS doesn't really have much stake in politics, so I also very much doubt it was a Justice that leaked it. The public overestimates how much Justices actually care about the issues themselves; they mostly care about their Constitutionality (and philosophical implications therein). I do think they actually know who leaked it, but naming and shaming would just lead to a lynch mob, political theater, and further erode trust in SCOTUS.