Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, November 19, 2022

In a letter to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and in interviews with The New York Times, the Rev. Rob Schenck, a former anti-abortion leader, said he was told the outcome of the 2014 Hobby Lobby case weeks before it was announced. He used that information to prepare a public relations push, records show, and he said that at the last minute he tipped off the president of Hobby Lobby, the craft store chain owned by Christian evangelicals that was the winning party in the case.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

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."

It's past time to launch a real investigation into Alito and his machinations on the Court. Alito has shown in his public speeches that he revels in owning the libs just like the most fervent partisans inside the Republican Party and the right wing echosphere.

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.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-19 10:50 AM | Reply

This is really really shocking stuff. Also seems like someone is definitely outright lying and one of the people who may be just outright lying is Alito.

Chris Hayes

This story is stunning.

In short: Alito himself leaked the Dobbs decision, and not only that, he's leaked his own opinions before, to right-wing litigants, so they could wine and dine other justices, and donate to their causes, to secure their vote.

Matthew Chapman

Why the hell are Supreme Court justices having dinners with ultra-rich conservative donors? It seems very injudicious and makes a farce of any pretense of neutrality or fairness.

Steven Greenhouse

#2 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-19 01:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This thread will be devoid of those right wing posters who were up in arms about the Dobbs leak.

#3 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-19 01:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Corruption must be nice when there are no consequences.

#4 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-19 01:32 PM | Reply

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?

#5 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-19 01:43 PM | Reply

@#5 ... 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. ...

Yup. Indeed, the precise wording of Judge Alito's denial seems to indicate that.

"...allegation that the Wrights were told the outcome of the decision ..."

They were not told the outcome of the decision. That "denial" leaves open to many other ways, one of which your comment notes, that he could have passed on information about the decision.

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.

#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-11-19 03:03 PM | Reply

Alito and his activist judges believe our laws should favor their own religion, not the law.

#7 | Posted by horstngraben at 2022-11-19 03:20 PM | Reply

Is Marsha Blackburn going to lead the charge to remove serial leaker Justice Alito?

twitter.com

#8 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2022-11-19 05:03 PM | Reply

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."

#9 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-19 05:53 PM | Reply

This Times story about SCOTUS is not just obviously incredibly damning for Alito, it looks really bad for Roberts too.

After treating the Dobbs leak as a serious threat to the Court's legitimacy, he got the letter with these allegations and then sat on it and covered it all up. It really makes a mockery of the idea Roberts has a deep concern for the integrity of the judiciary.

He would clearly have fired any lowly court clerk who leaked an opinion for political gain. But if a justice did it? Eh, let's just forget all this ever happened. All Roberts cares about is his appearances and his reputation. It's clear that Alito and Thomas could be out bribing hookers with sacks of ecstasy pills, and all he would care about is making sure no one ever found out about it.

He's as worthless and corrupt as the rest of them.

Matthew Chapman

#10 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-19 06:08 PM | Reply

@#9 ... there's the distinct likelihood that such a statement would be a bald-faced lie. ..

Ya think?

... 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." ...

Thanks for emphasizing that significant aspect of this.

This is starting to look not like a political disagreement, but more of a significant question of how, just how, the Supreme Court operates.

Of course, now we see why this was said...

Roberts: Disagreement Is Not a Basis for Criticizing' Supreme Court's Legitimacy (September 2022)
www.nationalreview.com

...Chief Justice John Roberts said disagreement with the Supreme Court's decisions is "not a basis for criticizing the legitimacy of the court," on Friday in his first public remarks since the Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

"The Court has always decided controversial cases and decisions always have been subject to intense criticism and that is entirely appropriate," Roberts said at a conference of judges and lawyers in Colorado Springs, per the Washington Post.

Roberts went on to say the Court is not guided by the political branches or public opinion.

"Yes, all of our opinions are open to criticism," he said. "In fact, our members do a great job of criticizing some opinions from time to time."

He added: "But simply because people disagree with an opinion is not a basis for criticizing the legitimacy of the court."...



Chief Justice Roberts appeared to be concerned that his charade was up.

#11 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-11-19 06:44 PM | Reply

Remember when Republicans were up in arms and threatening to essentially crucify whoever leaked the abortion case?

Here's your chance, GOP! We're waiting.

#12 | Posted by Sycophant at 2022-11-20 02:10 AM | Reply

Justices to the SCOTUS should be rotated in and out based on random selections from the federal appeals courts. Terms should be for 1 term. Furthermore, they should not be the ones to select the cases on which they will adjudicate; that should be done by the outgoing set of justices.

#13 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2022-11-20 08:20 AM | Reply

The SCOTUS is mainly made up of hypocritical, lying, conniving, right wing, corporate hacks. The left needs to push for impeachments of those that lied under oath to get approved.

#14 | Posted by Wildman62 at 2022-11-20 09:44 AM | Reply

Worded the right way, by picking carefully what you say, much information can be transmitted without actually coming right out and saying it bluntly. Just because Alito didn't come right out and say those words doesn't mean he didn't transmit what he wished known.

It has long been a practice that if you choose your words, you can get around near all rules of any forum. You never actually say something that breaks those rules but you leave no doubt what you mean even if it is contrary to those rules. In much the same manner, it would have been very easy for Alito to say without saying.

#15 | Posted by BBQ at 2022-11-20 12:45 PM | Reply

Never fails that the Drudge left fall for the musings of anonymous randos as long as it reinforces their deep held but largely unsupported bias.

#16 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-21 10:44 AM | Reply

Never fails that the Drudge left fall for the musings of anonymous randos as long as it reinforces their deep held but largely unsupported bias.

POSTED BY VISITOR_ AT 2022-11-21 10:44 AM | REPLY

Why don't you just go away. I mean seriously you're as useless as my nether bits.

#17 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-11-21 10:49 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2023 World Readable

Drudge Retort