Pirro's office leads criminal probe of 2022 Dobbs leak as five-year legal clock runs down

The Justice Department is running a criminal investigation into who leaked the 2022 draft Supreme Court opinion that overturned Roe v. Wade. Reports first published Thursday say Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney in Washington, is overseeing it ³⁵.

The probe has picked up speed in recent weeks, according to reports that cite The New York Times. Prosecutors have sent grand jury subpoenas for testimony and asked for information from people who worked at the court when the draft leaked ¹⁵. No suspect has been named and no charges have been announced ¹².

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment. The spokesperson said the department would "neither confirm nor deny the existence of an ongoing investigation" ³. Fox News, citing multiple sources, reported that the investigation has been going on for at least a year ⁴.

Who is running the case

Pirro assigned one of her top prosecutors, Carlton Davis, to lead the case, The Daily Beast reported ⁵. Davis was behind a failed attempt to indict six Democratic lawmakers over a video that urged service members to resist illegal orders ⁵.

From Channel GOPTrump's 'find 11,780 votes' call played at hearingDonald Trump · 248 plays · captioned, with the source named

The Washington Examiner, citing a source familiar with the probe, reported that career prosecutors are doing most of the work ³. President Trump said in July that the leaker "should be found" ⁵.

How the leak happened, and what the court found

Politico published the draft majority opinion on May 2, 2022. It showed a majority of justices ready to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the two rulings that had protected abortion rights nationwide for nearly 50 years ²⁴. The final decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, came on June 24, 2022 ⁴.

Chief Justice John Roberts had the court's marshal, Gail Curley, investigate. Her team formally interviewed 97 employees, and all of them denied leaking the draft. Everyone with access to it signed a sworn statement saying they were not the source ⁶. In January 2023, the court said investigators were "unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence" ⁴.

There was one notable gap. Curley spoke with each justice, but the justices were not asked to swear to anything under penalty of perjury ⁶. Democrats objected to that at the time.

I'm not clear why it appears the justices themselves were not part of the investigation into the Dobbs leak.

Johnson, a Georgia Democrat, then chaired the House Judiciary subcommittee on the courts. He added that "As long as the court has a transparency problem," public trust would keep falling ⁷.

Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the final Dobbs opinion, has said he has "a pretty good idea who is responsible" but not the proof to name anyone ⁶².

I do have an opinion. But the evidence available at this time is not strong enough.

No law against leaking a draft opinion

Prosecutors have a legal problem. No federal law specifically makes it a crime to leak the Supreme Court's internal deliberations ². The Justice Department has not said which law, if any, it would use ²⁴.

The most likely charge is theft of government property, which carries up to 10 years in prison ⁶. Prosecutors could also look at whether someone lied in the sworn statements given during the court's own investigation ⁶².

Time is short. Some of the laws that could apply have five-year limits on bringing charges, and those would run out next spring, Newsweek reported, citing the Times ². SCOTUSblog said a theft charge would have to be filed by about March 2027 ⁶.

Why this raises concerns

Cornell law professor Michael Dorf told the Times that the Justice Department can investigate federal crimes committed at the court, Newsweek reported. Dorf warned that if the leak turns out not to be a crime, an investigation by the executive branch could raise separation-of-powers concerns and risk the president's side of government harassing members of the judiciary ².

That matters because the same court is now deciding major cases on President Trump's own policies ². The Supreme Court has not said how much, if at all, it has worked with federal prosecutors ⁴.

The pattern is worth noting. This administration has put prosecutors to work on a leak that cost no one their abortion care. Meanwhile, the Dobbs ruling itself has led to more than 900 people being accused of pregnancy-related crimes in its first three years, according to a Pregnancy Justice report summarized by the Center for Reproductive Rights ⁸.

Control of the Senate is expected to change. With Democrats expected to control the Senate in January, a Trump Supreme Court confirmation now looks unlikely, SCOTUSblog reported ¹.

The Record

1. May 2, 2022Politico publishes the draft majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade ⁴.
2. Jun 24, 2022The Supreme Court issues its final Dobbs decision ⁴.
3. Jan 19, 2023The court says its marshal could not identify the leaker. Rep. Hank Johnson asks why the justices were not part of the investigation ⁴⁷.
4. Mar 6, 2026SCOTUSblog reports that a theft charge would have to be filed by about March 2027 ⁶.
5. Nov 5, 2026Reports say Jeanine Pirro's office is leading a criminal probe and has issued grand jury subpoenas ³⁵.

Free to reprint Republish this story on your site or in your newsletter

Any site, blog or newsletter may run this story free of charge. Keep the credit line and its link to the original, do not sell it, and edit only for length or house style (the full terms). Photos carry their own licenses, noted under each photo on this page, so use the text alone unless a credit says otherwise.

<h2>Pirro&#39;s office leads criminal probe of 2022 Dobbs leak as five-year legal clock runs down</h2> <p><em>By The GOP Files National Desk. This article first appeared on <a href="https://thegopfiles.com/story/pirro-s-office-leads-criminal-probe-of-2022-dobbs-leak-as-five-year-legal-clock">The GOP Files</a> on Saturday, November 7, 2026.</em></p> <p>The Justice Department is running a criminal investigation into who leaked the 2022 draft Supreme Court opinion that overturned Roe v. Wade. Reports first published Thursday say Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney in Washington, is overseeing it .</p> <p>The probe has picked up speed in recent weeks, according to reports that cite The New York Times. Prosecutors have sent grand jury subpoenas for testimony and asked for information from people who worked at the court when the draft leaked . No suspect has been named and no charges have been announced .</p> <p>A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment. The spokesperson said the department would &quot;neither confirm nor deny the existence of an ongoing investigation&quot; . Fox News, citing multiple sources, reported that the investigation has been going on for at least a year .</p> <h2>Who is running the case</h2> <p>Pirro assigned one of her top prosecutors, Carlton Davis, to lead the case, The Daily Beast reported . Davis was behind a failed attempt to indict six Democratic lawmakers over a video that urged service members to resist illegal orders .</p> <p>The Washington Examiner, citing a source familiar with the probe, reported that career prosecutors are doing most of the work . President Trump said in July that the leaker &quot;should be found&quot; .</p> <h2>How the leak happened, and what the court found</h2> <p>Politico published the draft majority opinion on May 2, 2022. It showed a majority of justices ready to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the two rulings that had protected abortion rights nationwide for nearly 50 years . The final decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women&#39;s Health Organization, came on June 24, 2022 .</p> <p>Chief Justice John Roberts had the court&#39;s marshal, Gail Curley, investigate. Her team formally interviewed 97 employees, and all of them denied leaking the draft. Everyone with access to it signed a sworn statement saying they were not the source . In January 2023, the court said investigators were &quot;unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence&quot; .</p> <p>There was one notable gap. Curley spoke with each justice, but the justices were not asked to swear to anything under penalty of perjury . Democrats objected to that at the time.</p> <blockquote><p>I&#39;m not clear why it appears the justices themselves were not part of the investigation into the Dobbs leak.</p><p>&mdash; Hank Johnson, Then-chair, House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Democrat-Georgia</p></blockquote> <p>Johnson, a Georgia Democrat, then chaired the House Judiciary subcommittee on the courts. He added that &quot;As long as the court has a transparency problem,&quot; public trust would keep falling .</p> <p>Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the final Dobbs opinion, has said he has &quot;a pretty good idea who is responsible&quot; but not the proof to name anyone .</p> <blockquote><p>I do have an opinion. But the evidence available at this time is not strong enough.</p><p>&mdash; Samuel Alito, Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court</p></blockquote> <h2>No law against leaking a draft opinion</h2> <p>Prosecutors have a legal problem. No federal law specifically makes it a crime to leak the Supreme Court&#39;s internal deliberations . The Justice Department has not said which law, if any, it would use .</p> <p>The most likely charge is theft of government property, which carries up to 10 years in prison . Prosecutors could also look at whether someone lied in the sworn statements given during the court&#39;s own investigation .</p> <p>Time is short. Some of the laws that could apply have five-year limits on bringing charges, and those would run out next spring, Newsweek reported, citing the Times . SCOTUSblog said a theft charge would have to be filed by about March 2027 .</p> <h2>Why this raises concerns</h2> <p>Cornell law professor Michael Dorf told the Times that the Justice Department can investigate federal crimes committed at the court, Newsweek reported. Dorf warned that if the leak turns out not to be a crime, an investigation by the executive branch could raise separation-of-powers concerns and risk the president&#39;s side of government harassing members of the judiciary .</p> <p>That matters because the same court is now deciding major cases on President Trump&#39;s own policies . The Supreme Court has not said how much, if at all, it has worked with federal prosecutors .</p> <p>The pattern is worth noting. This administration has put prosecutors to work on a leak that cost no one their abortion care. Meanwhile, the Dobbs ruling itself has led to more than 900 people being accused of pregnancy-related crimes in its first three years, according to a Pregnancy Justice report summarized by the Center for Reproductive Rights .</p> <p>Control of the Senate is expected to change. With Democrats expected to control the Senate in January, a Trump Supreme Court confirmation now looks unlikely, SCOTUSblog reported .</p> <p><em>Read the original, with every source linked, at <a href="https://thegopfiles.com/story/pirro-s-office-leads-criminal-probe-of-2022-dobbs-leak-as-five-year-legal-clock">thegopfiles.com</a>. Republished under The GOP Files' <a href="https://thegopfiles.com/republish">free republishing terms</a>.</em></p> <img src="https://thegopfiles.com/api/rp/pirro-s-office-leads-criminal-probe-of-2022-dobbs-leak-as-five-year-legal-clock.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" style="border:0;width:1px;height:1px">

Copy the HTML Paste it into your editor's HTML view. The one-pixel image at the end tells our newsroom the story ran; it stores no reader data.

Sources

1. SCOTUSblog, “DOJ steps up its investigation into the Dobbs leak” (2026-11-06). scotusblog.com/2026/11/doj-steps-up-its-investigation-into-t
2. Newsweek, “Supreme Court Under Criminal Probe by DOJ—Which Laws May Have Been Broken” (2026-11-06). newsweek.com/doj-supreme-court-abortion-dobbs-leak-investiga
3. Washington Examiner, “Pirro's office leading criminal investigation into Supreme Court Dobbs leak” (2026-11-05). washingtonexaminer.com/news/supreme-court/4794552/pirro-offi
4. Fox News (via WFMD), “DOJ launches criminal probe into Supreme Court leak that exposed ruling overturning Roe v. Wade” (2026-11-05). wfmd.com/2026/11/05/doj-launches-criminal-probe-into-supreme
5. The Daily Beast, “Trump Goons Ramp Up Chase of Supreme Court Decision Leaker” (2026-11-05). thedailybeast.com/trump-goons-ramp-up-chase-of-supreme-court
6. SCOTUSblog, “Will the mystery of the Dobbs leak ever be solved?” (2026-03-06). scotusblog.com/2026/03/will-the-mystery-of-the-dobbs-leak-ev
7. Office of Rep. Hank Johnson (house.gov), “Congressman Johnson's Statement on Supreme Court Leak Investigation” (2023-01-19). hankjohnson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressma
8. Center for Reproductive Rights, “U.S. Repro Watch: Six Updates You Won't Want to Miss, 11.6.26” (2026-11-06). reproductiverights.org/news/u-s-repro-watch-11-6-26/

Found an error? Tell the newsroom. Corrections are noted at the top of the story.