Special to WorldTribune.com

By Bill Juneau

After eight months of an investigation and a dramatic announcement that the leaker of a SCOTUS draft opinion would be found, identified and dealt with in accord with law, the chief investigator has come up empty handed.

The unsuccessful gumshoe into this mystery was Col. Gail Curley, 53, who is Marshal of the U.S. Supreme Court.

She was directed by Chief Justice John Roberts to dig into the matter and find the person who betrayed his or her sacred trust and slipped the draft opinion of a decision in  Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to the Politico News organization.

The draft opinion, purloined last May, foretold that the Roe V. Wade decision of 75 years ago would be overturned, and that a woman’s federal right to an abortion would be canceled. The explosive opinion proved to be accurate, and six weeks later the  historic Dobbs decision was formally handed down, and it mirrored the stolen opinion given to the media.

In a 23-page written report, Marshal Curley said that there were 126 formal interviews of 97 employees.  The interviews were directed at all persons who had ability and opportunity to know about or see the draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito.

Included were the four clerks to each of the nine Associate Justices; typists, runners, and members of the clean up crews.  Aside from the nine justices, all others who might have access to the chambers and courtrooms  signed statements under oath of their lack of involvement or knowledge of the source of the disclosure.  Apparently, use of polygraph examinations was never considered.  The nine justices were interviewed, said Curley, but were not invited to sign sworn affidavits as she said she did not see the necessity for that.

But the investigative team under Curley, according to a news story in the Wall Street Journal, actually narrowed the search to the bank of clerks, but were unable to land on the miscreant by a preponderance of the evidence.

The integrity and thoroughness of the investigation, though unsuccessful in identifying the source of the shameful disclosure, was reviewed by an expert in the investigative field and found to be professional and that no stone was left unturned.

Nevertheless, some lawyers and other government groupies remain astounded that the guilty party or parties could not be found in view of all the modern and available investigative techniques.

Some hold onto the belief that the identity of the culpable person is known inside those SCOTUS walls and chambers, and has always been known to the clerks and even to the justices since the time that the opinion was misappropriated and given to the media where it went viral.  Perhaps the belief is that identification would generate unwanted publicity and embarrassment, and so it is best for all if the episode simply vanishes like the wind.

There has been  criticism of Col. Curley whose background as an army officer did  not provide her with the expertise and knowledge in dealing with  a “who done it” mystery.

Curley, a lawyer,  was appointed by the Chief Justice in June, 2021 as the court’s 11th Court Marshal.  As such, she serves as the court’s chief security officer,  facilities administrator and contracting executive.  As explained in press releases upon her appointment, she supervises approximately 260 employees including the Supreme Court Police Force which provides security for the  Justices, Court Staff, visitors, the building and surrounding grounds.

The Marshal’s office was not constituted to conduct in house investigations into sensitive leaks involving trusted employees in high level jobs.  Col. Curley has wide-ranging and impressive academic credentials, but getting down in the trenches and searching for political trouble makers, may not be the type of situation for which she is really qualified.

Somehow, the effort to find the SCOTUS leaker is in a way reminiscent of the tale of Naval Captain Philip Queeg and his investigation into some missing strawberries on the Caine Mutiny, a WW II  battleship. “The Caine Mutiny” is a  movie classic from the 1950s.

On  the enigmatic Capt. Queeg’s orders, countless hours and days were spent in a search for the sailor who stole strawberries from the mess hall.  As it turned out, a lowly seaman had pilfered the berries, and Queeg knew about it, but ordered the search anyway to assert his concern and authority aboard the naval ship.

Still and all, Col. Curley’s search for the man or woman who gave the explosive draft opinion to the media, may not be over.  In Col. Curley’s closing report, she noted that “to the extent that additional investigation yields new evidence or leads, the investigators will pursue them.”  In time, she wrote, “continued investigation and analysis may produce additional leads that could identify the source of the disclosure.”

In the absence of any new evidence or a public and painful admission of responsibility for the disclosure,  it is doubtful that the court will entertain future discussions on the matter.

Bill Juneau worked for 25 years as a reporter and night city editor at the Chicago Tribune. Subsequently he became a partner in a law firm and also served as a village prosecutor and as a consultant to the Cook County Circuit Court and to the Cook County Medical Examiner. He is currently writing columns and the ‘Florida Bill‘ blog.

  Unsolved mysteries: The case of the Supreme Court leaker