It Doesn’t Matter Who Leaked It

Regardless of where the leak came from, theocrats still remain a threat to democracy

By now, you’d have to be living under a rock not to know about the leaked U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion (Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization) that previews the overturning of Roe v. Wade. It’s a decision many of us have been dreading for a long time. When the official court ruling is released at the end of June, we should expect all hell to break loose.

Chief Justice John Roberts has confirmed the leak. He launched an investigation into the source of the leak. In due time, we will probably find out who leaked it. That person (or persons) will most likely face some consequences.

What This Means

Dobbs is the first domino for theocrats. They are hell-bent on using courts, legislatures, and media platforms to force-feed us their flavor of morality

Once the decision is formally rendered, a woman’s right to abortion will revert back to the states. States in which legislatures have specifically codified reproductive rights will become safe havens for women to seek abortion services.

Meanwhile, states with outdated anti-choice laws on the books will become danger zones where — depending on the specific laws — doctors and patients could face legal/criminal charges if an abortion is performed.

State control of a woman’s body is rooted in religious fundamentalism. Merging these evangelical beliefs with secular law is the foundation of theocracy. And it’s dangerous.

With a pivotal midterm election coming up, Republicans and social conservatives are predictably trying to deflect. Their feathers have been ruffled because the leak happened in the first place…not because millions of women will face an increased burden of health risks.

They’re mad that they were unable to control the timeline, as it related to when the overturn of Roe vs. Wade would be publicly announced.

A month-and-a-half is an eternity, in politics. Understandable rage from progressive, liberal, and centrist supporters of reproductive freedoms will now simmer for much longer. This summer is going to boil over in more ways than one.

Let’s Squash the Distractions

My personal feelings on abortion are irrelevant, here. I’m a gay dude with no desire to raise children of my own. I support abortion in most cases — but it shouldn’t be up to me, regardless, because I don’t have a doctor’s medical qualifications:

I think it’s very telling that pro-life mouthpieces in the political world are scrambling to shift emphasis to the source of the leak. They are letting us know, in no uncertain terms, that this leak was UNACCEPTABLE and the leaker MUST BE PUNISHED.

While I’m not a fan of The View’s Sunny Hostin (mainly due to her neoliberal narcissism), her reaction to the right-wing pearl-clutching — as she articulated during the program’s May 4 broadcast — was right on the money:

I’m so much less concerned with who leaked this than what was in the leak, and I think Republicans and conservatives have been working for fifty years for this. And now, they’re playing victim. Now they’re crying out, ‘Who leaked it? Who leaked it?’ This is what they have wanted. And I think our reaction needs to be, ‘Who cares about who leaked it? We care about WHAT was leaked! We care about the fact that women’s rights are now no longer protected.’ And we now know that the Supreme Court is politicized. What we need to think about is: where do we go from here? The Supreme Court, if this draft opinion does become the opinion, is now saying ‘It’s up to the states.’ We now need to codify a woman’s rights to her own body, and I think the way we do that is we legislate [new and fairer laws].

Well said, Sunny!

Of course, progressives and liberals and moderates won’t be in a position to actually legislate unless Democrats retain or increase their seats in both chambers of Congress.

This makes it all the more bewildering to me, from a tactical standpoint, why anti-choice conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court would choose a midterm election year in which to render such an inflammatory ruling.

Perhaps they assume voter turnout for the 2022 midterms will remain as low as it has been, historically, for most midterm election cycles.

You know what they say about assuming…

The Leak Is Less Important Than Its Ramifications

Eventually, we’ll find out who leaked the opinion draft. Some people think it came from a conservative clerk, hoping to put pressure on the right-wing justices so they won’t alter their ruling at the last minute. Others think it came from a liberal clerk, hoping to incite even earlier agitation and voter mobilization amongst pro-choice folks.

Who else could it have been? John Roberts himself? Ginni Thomas? Josh Gerstein? Alexander Ward? Carmen Sandiego?

If we learn that the leaker was a clerk, they’ll probably be disbarred. But under what laws would anyone be able to criminally prosecute them? I believe it’s highly unlikely the leaker will face prison time — or even have to pay a fine.

We should ask: why has this never happened before?

I suspect it’s because most major U.S. Supreme Court decisions have never incited such intense splits in public opinion.

Brown v. Board of Education and its follow-up rulings granted rights (rather than taking them away) that racially desegregated the country. Americans were sharply divided over segregation, but this type of pre-ruling leak was rare in the 1950s. Technology was more primitive, and rabble-rousers were more cautious about rocking the boat.

Mapp v. Ohio reduced unlawful searches-and-seizures.

Gideon v. Wainwright gave accused parties free legal counsel.

Lawrence v. Texas granted Americans consensual romantic privacy in their bedrooms.

Obergfell v. Hodges made same-sex marriage legal in all fifty states.

Even something that involved chipping away at rights, such as 2013’s Shelby County v. Holder, was rendered in such a wonky and subversive manner that most lay people couldn’t digest its adverse outcome.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization demolishes existing rights in such a blatant manner that there’s no denying the volatility it will create.

The Slippery Slope

Even if Justice Samuel Alito and the rest of the majority in Dobbs were willing to go back in and soften the impact of this ruling with accommodationist language, it wouldn’t matter.

The genie is out of the bottle … and it’s not going back in.

Whoever the leaker was, he or she exposed the tyrannical vision of Alito & Company. Whether you like their methods or not, the leaker did our nation a service.

Now, every campaign rally and political ad will be about how far backward the Alito/Thomas Court is willing to thrust us. What’s next on their agenda?

Allowing states to ban contraception and birth control? With an excise tax on condoms?

Mitch McConnell’s national abortion ban?

Financial rewards for anti-abortion bounty hunters or citizens who turn in anyone participating in an illegal procedure?

Governmental control over fertility treatments?

Mandatory DNA testing for citizens?

“Morality panels” whose members render decisions on whether somebody’s marriage and cohabitation decisions happen to be virtuous enough for their taste?

Where does it end?

No Longer a White-Glove Affair

In addition to the other issues Democrats need to emphasize — they must back every Republican candidate into a corner on this. Do you oppose the federal government regulating birth control, fertility care, gay marriage, school prayer, and sex ed?

Do you support a state’s “right” to create draconian, harmful policies in these areas?

A broad coalition of thinkers outside of the far-right must identify a minimum standard for abortion access that could apply across all fifty states. I’m uncertain what that standard would be. Three months? Six months? That’s why there should be universal exceptions granted in the cases of rape, incest, or medical necessity. Doctors need to be protected so they don’t lose their licenses due to their failure to provide an unattainable burden of proof (against allegations of medical negligence).

Aside from cultists, most people respond well to reasonable proposals. If all permutations are accounted for — taking into account everyone’s safety, privacy, and sovereignty — those plans would be an easy sell. Then, it becomes up to us to promote them while drowning out noise from the fringes.

They want a culture war?

Well…that’s exactly what we’re going to give them!