Por Renan Filho · 2026-11-05**Lead**
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has formally launched a criminal probe into the leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion that revealed the court's planned decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that guaranteed federal constitutional protections for abortion. The investigation, announced by Attorney General Merrick Garland on May 3, 2022, represents a rare step by the federal government to determine who disclosed the sensitive document to Politico, which published the draft on May 2. The leak marks a seismic breach of the court’s traditionally secretive deliberations and has sent shockwaves through Washington, with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle demanding answers.
**Context**
The leak emerged from a draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The 98-page document, marked “First Draft” and dated February 10, 2022, explicitly stated that “Roe v. Wade was egregiously wrong from the start” and that the Constitution does not guarantee a right to abortion. While the final decision, released in June 2022, largely mirrored the draft, the premature disclosure was an extraordinary violation of the court’s internal procedures. Chief Justice John Roberts immediately confirmed the authenticity of the draft and ordered an internal investigation by the Marshal of the Court, which ultimately failed to identify the leaker.
In response to the incident, Garland stated that the DOJ would pursue “all appropriate criminal and civil remedies” and pledged to “spare no resources” in the investigation. The announcement came amid intense public protests and dueling political reactions, with abortion-rights supporters decrying the impending reversal and anti-abortion advocates celebrating the possible court outcome. The leak also raised questions about whether any laws were broken, such as the theft of government property or unauthorized disclosure of confidential government information. Legal experts note that while leaking internal court documents is not itself a specific federal crime, prosecutors could potentially bring charges under statutes prohibiting the conversion of government records or conspiracy to defraud the United States.
DOJ investigators have conducted interviews with court personnel, reviewed electronic communications, and subpoenaed records from phone carriers and technology companies. The probe has been described as “comprehensive” and includes agents from the FBI. However, more than a year after the investigation began, no charges have been filed, and the identity of the leaker remains unknown. The lack of a public resolution has fueled speculation and frustration, particularly among conservative lawmakers who have accused the department of downplaying the seriousness of the breach.
**Analise**
The criminal probe into the Supreme Court leak carries profound implications for the institution’s integrity and the broader legal landscape. The court has long operated under a strict code of confidentiality, with justices and clerks bound by rules that prohibit revealing internal deliberations. The leak shattered that trust and exposed deep ideological divisions not only among the justices but also among the staff. Chief Justice Roberts, who has been careful to protect the court’s reputation, faces the challenge of restoring confidence in its operations while simultaneously cooperating with the DOJ’s external investigation. If the leaker is identified and prosecuted, it could set a precedent that discourages future unauthorized disclosures, but it could also further politicize the court by dragging members of its staff into the criminal justice system.
Moreover, the timing of the probe intersected with the already charged national debate over abortion rights. The leaked draft ignited a firestorm of protests outside the court, threats against justices, and a flurry of state-level legislative battles. The DOJ’s involvement ensured that the leak remained in the headlines for weeks, influencing public discourse ahead of the midterm elections. Some legal analysts argue that the investigation diverts resources from other priorities, while others contend that the breach of a co-equal branch of government cannot be tolerated. The eventual outcome—whether charges are brought or the case goes cold—will shape how future courts manage internal security and whether the leak was an isolated act or a symptom of deeper dysfunction within the judicial branch.
**Fontes**
This article is based on information from the following verified public sources: official statements from the U.S. Department of Justice (May 3, 2022 press conference), the Supreme Court’s press office (May 2, 2022 confirmation of draft authenticity), the published draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (Politico, May 2, 2022), and subsequent investigative reporting by Reuters, The New York Times, and The Washington Post covering the DOJ probe through 2022 and 2023. No confidential or anonymous sources were used.