The latest leak about the Supreme Court's internal deliberations on three major cases involving former President Donald Trump may have come from a senior member of the minority, former clerks and longtime court observers told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Sunday paper based its findings on “the justices' private notes, hearing transcripts and interviews with both conservative and liberal court officials.” Report The report, published by The New York Times, offered a glimpse into the justices' decision-making process in three major cases, including Trump v. United States, in which the Supreme Court ruled that former presidents are immune from prosecution for official acts committed while in office. The report primarily targets Chief Justice John Roberts, highlighting his efforts to reach consensus on the controversial case.

“This is another disturbing leak from the Supreme Court that Congress should investigate because it is clear that a member of the minority is conspiring with the left to destroy the Supreme Court,” JCN President Carrie Severino told DCNF.

The justices vote and give their opinions on cases in a post-oral argument conference, which is closed to all staff, including law clerks. Only the justices are allowed in the room. According to Supreme Court minutes.

In a Feb. 22 memo from Justice Roberts to his colleagues obtained by The New York Times, he criticized the lower courts for “never addressing the most difficult issues” in Trump's immunity appeal and argued that the lower courts should hear the case. (Related article: Presidential election results in “largest jury verdict in history,” Trump's legal battle stalled)

Some conservative justices wanted to postpone the case until their next term, but Justice Roberts supported the liberal justices' desire to hear the case during his current term, The New York Times reported.

In Fisher v. United States, Justice Roberts took over writing the opinion originally assigned to Justice Samuel Alito, according to The New York Times. In Fisher, the Supreme Court found that the Department of Justice had overbroadly interpreted the obstruction statute used to prosecute hundreds of January 6 defendants.

In Trump v. Anderson, which considered Colorado's decision to remove Trump from the ballot, Justice Roberts had hoped to issue a unanimous, unsigned opinion. In the final opinion, Justice Roberts would side with the conservative justices who wanted to find that only Congress can enforce the “insurrection ban” of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, with the liberal justices and Justice Amy Coney Barrett writing concurring opinions that condemn the majority for overreach, according to The New York Times.

These damning leaks of confidential court documents are deliberately aimed at intimidating and pressuring principled judges to change their views on future important cases.

And if they don't, their reputation will be dragged through the mud and they… pic.twitter.com/GCiSr2FTrN

— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) September 16, 2024

Josh Blackman, professor at South Texas College of Law, Houston Claimed Reason magazine said the New York Times report was “far worse than the Dobbs leak” and announced Alito's draft ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022. Leaked In an interview with Politico, he noted that the recent leaks were “systematic and thorough” and required insight from “so many different people.”

“Moreover, all of this occurred in the wake of the Dobbs leak, at a time when Chief Justice Roberts (apparently) had imposed severe restrictions on access to court information,” he wrote. “What did these measures accomplish? Apparently not much.”

Blackmun wrote that she believes Justice Elena Kagan's absence from the report suggests that she or her attorneys were behind the leak.

“If Ms. Kagan is willing to publicly disparage her colleagues in speeches before the Ninth Circuit, why not do so privately,” he wrote. “Furthermore, this entire story is consistent with Ms. Kagan's approach to stating that the Supreme Court is doing its best for Mr. Trump.” (Related: New York Times “insider” opinion piece on Dobbs decision raises “disturbing” concerns about Supreme Court secrecy, legal experts say)

Kagan publicly called for an enforcement mechanism for the Supreme Court's ethics rules in July. Suggest The 9th Circuit Judicial Conference ruled that lower court judges could enforce the code. According to Democrats have repeatedly called for an enforcement mechanism since the Supreme Court adopted the ethics rule last year, according to CNN.

“It's clear that Democratic justices are so upset about being in the minority for the rest of their lives that they just want to destroy the legitimacy of the Supreme Court,” said Mike Davis, founder of the Article III Project. Written Regarding X. “(Elena, I'm looking at you after your crazy, public, unconstitutional call to have lower court judges oversee legal disputes in the Supreme Court).”

Ilya Shaprio, director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute, told DCNF that the leak “reflects further frustration on the left at losing control of the Supreme Court.”

“This is all part of a campaign to smear and pressure judges and ultimately delegitimize one of the few institutions that can uphold the rule of law and resist progressive fascism,” Shaprio said.

The Supreme Court's public information office did not respond to a request for comment on whether the new leaks would be investigated.

As an independent, nonpartisan news service, all content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation is available free of charge to any legitimate news publisher with a large readership. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and affiliation with the DCNF. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.