Steven MazieJan 20, 2023
BREAKING: Supreme Court says the Justices were consulted but not asked to sign affidavits in the Dobbs leak investigation
Show threadSteven Mazie

The logic is odd: Curley says she saw no reason to ask the Justices to sign affidavits because there were no credible leads implicating the Justices or their spouses.

Were there credible leads implicating all of the Court employees who *were* asked to sign affidavits?

Jan 20, 2023 at 9:34pmWeb
Show threadSteven MazieJan 20, 2023
I take it the answer is no. All 97 other employees, but not the nine justices, were asked to sign affidavits.
Show threadJDJan 20, 2023
@stevenmazie has there been a time in our history when the Supreme Court has been this politically corrupted?
Show threadMary Ann HornJan 20, 2023
@stevenmazie hmmm
Show threadMary Ann HornJan 20, 2023
@stevenmazie Handled just like the archbishops in the Catholic Church…who would dare…
Show threadMike ParsonsJan 20, 2023

@stevenmazie

>there were no credible leads implicating the Justices or their spouses

I mean, other than the fact that Alito has done it before, and that Ginni Thomas is, well, Ginni Thomas.

Show threadChristie DudleyJan 21, 2023
@stevenmazie I imagine it's particularly hard to think of the Justices as mere mortals. That goes very much against the spirit of their lifetime appointments.