The evidence for Mr. Schenck's account of the breach has gaps. But in months of examining Mr. Schenck's claims, The Times found a trail of contemporaneous emails and conversations that strongly suggested he knew the outcome and the author of the Hobby Lobby decision before it was made public.

In early June 2014, an Ohio couple who were Mr. Schenck's star donors shared a meal with Justice Alito and his wife, Martha-Ann. A day later, Gayle Wright, one of the pair, contacted Mr. Schenck, according to an email reviewed by The Times. "Rob, if you want some interesting news please call. No emails," she wrote.

Mr. Schenck said Mrs. Wright told him that the decision would be favorable to Hobby Lobby, and that Justice Alito had written the majority opinion. Three weeks later, that's exactly what happened. The court ruled, in a 5-4 vote, that requiring family-owned corporations to pay for insurance covering contraception violated their religious freedoms. The decision would have major implications for birth control access, President Barack Obama's new health care law and corporations' ability to claim religious rights.

Justice Alito, in a statement issued through the court's spokeswoman, denied disclosing the decision. He said that he and his wife shared a "casual and purely social relationship" with the Wrights, and did not dispute that the two couples ate together on June 3, 2014. But the justice said that the "allegation that the Wrights were told the outcome of the decision in the Hobby Lobby case, or the authorship of the opinion of the Court, by me or my wife, is completely false."

And yet again, just like with Trump's involvement in the January 6th insurrection, the evidence and testimony comes from partisans inside the right wing political establishment, NOT anyone or anything having to do with critics or political opponents whatsoever. This Supreme Court is corrupted by right wing politics and unfortunately will likely continue to see more examples coming into the light as more time passes. The public should have zero faith in this Court to be either fair nor impartial. They don't rule on the law, they rule to codify their desired political outcomes.

But [Alito] said that the "allegation that the Wrights were told the outcome of the decision in the Hobby Lobby case, or the authorship of the opinion of the Court, by me or my wife, is completely false."

I can almost guarantee how this conversation went down if indeed Alito didn't "directly" tell the Wrights of the decision. Once the topic was broached, all Alito had to do was say something to the effect "Even though I obviously can't tell you the details, guess who's writing the majority opinion(?)" making it clear that he was referring to himself. That's all it would take for the Wrights to know precisely how the case was decided without any direct admission on the part of Alito.

From how Alito has acted so blatantly partisan in public settings since his ascension to the SCOTUS, why would any thinking American have doubts that he would be equally loquacious and forthcoming when dining and conversing with those he shares hard partisan leanings with?

I'd be a lot happier if Judge Alito said something to the effect, "I never discuss Supreme Court cases with anyone outside the Supreme Court.

It's not something he'd ever say because there's the distinct likelihood that such a statement would be a bald-faced lie.

And so no one misses one of the larger issues here, Rev. Schenck sent this letter to Chief Justice Roberts in JULY, and there hasn't been a peep about it coming from Roberts' supposed "leak investigation."