Supreme Court to Boost Security as Leak Probe Is Unresolved (1)

The Supreme Court may not have ruled identification .

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts Calls for a “comprehensive review” of the court’s information and document practices, requiring outside experts to limit the distribution of hard-copy draft opinions and the dissemination of confidential information via email and mobile devices. is recommended.

These are among the measures recommended by Michael Chertoff, former Homeland Security Secretary and Federal Court of Appeals Judge, was brought in to review the Supreme Court Marshal’s investigation.Chertoff was a former Supreme Court Justice clerk William Brennan.

READ MORE: Supreme Court Investigation Could Not Identify Who Leaked Opinion

Chertoff also recommended that courts utilize “information rights management” tools to control the use and sharing of confidential information.

“While there is not sufficient evidence at this time to warrant indictment or other legal action, the investigation has provided important insights that can be acted upon to avoid future incidents,” Chertoff wrote.

An investigation is currently underway to prevent future incidents, the report said, and many of the potential updates are “ongoing and will be completed as soon as feasible.”

But the report denounced the court’s aging computer systems and practices, noting that “existing platforms for case-related documents appear outdated and in need of an overhaul.” Court printers also had limited tracking capabilities and some were not connected to the court’s network, so investigators were not able to glean much information by examining court printers.

security gap

“If it is an employee of the court, or a person with access to the employee’s home, that person should act with impunity due to inadequate security regarding the movement of hard-copy documents from the court to the home. We were able to track print jobs on courtroom printers and copiers, as well as other security and policy gaps,” the report said.

Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson says the fact that there have been no similar leaks in the past has less to do with the court’s outdated security measures and more to do with the norms within the building.

“It’s hard for an outsider to understand how much privacy and discretion are respected in the judiciary,” Levinson said.

justice Clarence Thomas“Former clerk Carrie Severino It’s hard to know if there will be similar leaks in the future, or if this was a “one-off” given the unusual impact of Dob’s decision.

However, pointing to the Bush v. Gore case that determined the outcome of the contested 2000 presidential election, and the fact that there were no leaks there despite the interests involved, there are signs that something has changed. There is, she said.

“Time will tell if the courts can rebuild that trust,” Severino said.

(Updates with external comments.)

To contact the reporter of this article:
Kimberly Robinson Arlington, krobinson103@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this article:
Elizabeth Wasserman at ewasserman2@bloomberg.net

Seth Stern

© 2023 Bloomberg LP All rights reserved. Used with permission.