The Supreme Court failed to disclose its long-standing financial arrangements with former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff who independently validated the nine-month investigation into the leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.
Last week, in tandem with Chertoff’s oversight, the high court said it has so far failed to identify who was responsible for the May 2, 2022, leak of the draft opinion. Sources familiar with the matter told CNN that the court has privately contracted the Chertoff Group for security assessments, such as covering the safety of the justices and some consultation related to pandemic protocols at the high court.
FAILURE TO FIND SUPREME COURT LEAKER TESTS JUSTICES’ ABILITY TO BUILD BACK TRUST
Payouts for consultations from Chertoff’s risk assessment firm reached upward of $1 million, the outlet reported, noting that exact amounts cannot be known because the high court is not covered under federal public disclosure constraints. Such services also involved a review of the justices’ homes, according to the outlet.
Jared Carter, a professor at Vermont Law School, told the Washington Examiner that “if all of that’s accurate, it’s another hit on the Supreme Court’s credibility.”
“Because, at the very least, it creates an appearance that’s problematic to the integrity of the investigation. And that hurts the Supreme Court’s standing in the public’s eye, and that, as a result, hurts the court’s credibility and hurts the rule of law ultimately and our confidence in the court,” Carter added.
A 20-page report on the draft leak investigation was published last week and included commentary from the public information office, Supreme Court Marshal Gail A. Curley, and Chertoff providing his analysis on Curley’s efforts.
In Chertoff’s section, he wrote that he “cannot identify any additional useful investigative measure.” But one day after the report’s release, Curley released a supplemental statement noting the nine justices were interviewed as part of the leak investigation but were not forced to sign affidavits, unlike the 97 court employees who were asked to make sworn statements.
“During the course of the investigation, I spoke with each of the Justices, several on multiple occasions,” Curley said in a statement. “The Justices actively cooperated in this iterative process, asking questions and answering mine. I followed up on all credible leads, none of which implicated the Justices or their spouses.
“On this basis, I did not believe that it was necessary to ask the Justices to sign sworn affidavits,” Curley said.
When the Washington Examiner contacted the Chertoff Group, a spokesperson pointed to the high court’s information office.
When CNN contacted the high court PIO, it said, “The Court as a matter of policy does not discuss security measures.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
In addition to previous financial ties to the high court, Chertoff had personal connections to the justices through his Ivy League education. He and Chief Justice John Roberts served in successive years as law clerks on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.
The Washington Examiner contacted the Supreme Court for comment.
