Will the Supreme Court leaker ever face any consequences?
It has been over two weeks since Politico published a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito that provides the rationale on why Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized abortion nationwide, has to be overturned.
The document, which was leaked to Politico by an unnamed "source," launched a thousand protests all over the country.
Law enforcement was compelled to place barricades before the Supreme Court building in Washington, and U.S. Marshals had to provide around-the-clock security at the homes of Supreme Court justices because of relentless intimidation from the "protesters."
That wasn't all. "Protestors" vandalized Catholic churches and pregnancy centers. Hoodlums tossed a Molotov cocktail into the offices of a Wisconsin pro-life group. The rapidly moving news cycle and the pace at which the Democrats mobilized their hooligans could cause people to forget how it all started.
The starting point was the leak.
The word "unprecedented" is frequently used without much consideration in current times, but this leak truly was unprecedented. Supreme Court historians, law professionals, and court observers have expressed shock over the leak, saying they cannot recall any such previous instance.
Chief Justice John Roberts called the leak a "betrayal of the confidences of the Court" and vowed that its work will not be affected in any way. He also said he has directed the marshal of the court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak.
Democrat leaders, including Biden, Harris, and Pelosi, have not uttered even perfunctory words of criticism for the leaker. Therefore, it seems likely that the leaker was a liberal attempting to apply public pressure to prevent the justices from overturning Roe v. Wade.
A good test to know what is morally right is to see what the Democrats stand for and do the exact opposite.
The Supreme Court or any other Court is supposed to be apolitical. A court's function is to be as objective as possible in interpreting the Constitution. Once upon a time, the phrase "I have full faith in the Judiciary" was frequently used because the public did actually feel like that. Those days are sadly over.
We are at a juncture where societal trust in governmental institutions and the courts is at an all-time low.
For this particular ruling, irrespective of the direction that the Supreme Court takes, there will be a section of people who will always view it as either a compromise or a capitulation, or a purposeful act of defiance against the mob.
To restore this rapidly eroding faith, the leaker must immediately face consequences for his actions. In addition to punishment, it will also serve as a deterrent to aspiring leakers and snitches.
According to Bloomberg Law, the marshal and Supreme Court Police have the authority to make arrests for violations of state or federal law. However, for this leak, any potential decision on prosecution most likely would come from the Justice Department.
Even if the leaker doesn't face criminal prosecution, this offense must at least cause a permanent stain on the individual's professional record. Perhaps disbarment would be a fitting punishment.
If the individual turns out to be a pro-abortion liberal, do not be too surprised if the Democrats attempt to brand the leaker as a whistleblower and demand that he receive all the protection a whistleblower gets for "doing the right thing."
It is beyond any doubt that the leaker will receive a hero's worship among liberals, irrespective of punishment. Celebrities will fund legal defense and bail.
We also know that the liberal ecosystem enables its own to prosper. The leaker will have myriad career choices. If the individual is reasonably well-spoken, he can be a pundit on MSNBC or CNN. Perhaps the leaker can host a podcast or write books or host documentaries on Netflix. There could be lucrative speaking assignments and endorsements. Perhaps the individual joins politics and becomes a member of AOC's Squad.
If the individual prefers to remain in the shadows, the leaker could launch a BLM-style pro-abortion advocacy group and make millions. Perhaps the slogan will be "No Lives Matter."
The pecuniary gains made by the leaker would be considerably higher than what would have been earned from a regular career path. It is even possible that the leak may have been a calculated move in close coordination with the top echelons of the Democrat party, knowing that it provides a shortcut to prosperity without any perspiration.
If the leaker does indeed prosper, it sends a bad message to everyone working in an office of importance.
If, however, the leaker turns out to be a conservative who wanted to pressure the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, then the treatment meted out will make the punishment given to January 6 protesters seem like a picnic.
Beyond public confidence and perception, the leak affects the work environment of the courts. Personnel at various levels will hesitate to express themselves freely for fear of being exposed to the public and attacked. There will be those who stick to the liberal groupthink just to avoid placing themselves and their families at peril.
The liberal mob is hence slowly but certainly gnawing at the roots of the democratic foundation of America. If the mob is not stopped, someday, the root will be so weakened that it will all come tumbling down. The damage will be irreparable, and then there will be anarchy.
The only group that can stop them is the Republicans.
The question is, are they up to the challenge?