The Supreme Court has not spoken out about the leak of a draft opinion regarding Roe v. Wade’s overturning. It was almost eight months ago. The court is now being investigated by the congressional Republicans.

Ohio’s Rep. Jim Jordan is poised to assume the chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee if the Republican-led House gains control in January. An aide confirmed that it was a priority.

“Dozens of churches were targeted, dozens and even dozens were attacked by pro-life crisis pregnancy centres, protests took place at the homes of Supreme Court justices, and there was an attempt to assassinate Justice [Brent M.] Kavanaugh. To date, there has not been a single hearing on the leak in the House Judiciary Committee. Jordan recently stated that there was not one hearing.

Since the leak, protesters have been gathering outside the homes of justices. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. announced that the investigation has been continuing with no public updates.

The Supreme Court didn’t respond to a request for information from The Washington Times. Justice Elena Kagan, however, suggested in September that an update might be made by the end October, according to reports.

Carrie Severino, President of Judicial Crisis Network, and a former clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas, said that “the whole process was really mystifying.”

Ms. Severino stated that Republican leaders on the House Judiciary Committee might ask about the leak investigation at a hearing in the upcoming Congress, when some of the justices will be discussing funding needs.

She said, “Once per year, a small group of justices comes and testify about funding needs of judicial branches. I believe that would be the chance they have to pose questions.”

Chief Justice Roberts appointed Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley to lead the investigation just days after May’s leak. Former Army colonel and lawyer, Ms. Curley was less than one year old when she was given the task of investigating the leak.

The court has not issued an update from Ms. Curley or the chief justice.

Legal scholars debate whether the leak is a crime, aside from speculations about the source of the document. If the leaker wanted to influence the outcome of the case, some say it could have been theft or obstruction of justice. Some others claim that Supreme Court documents aren’t protected by confidentiality laws that apply to other areas of government.

Court watchers were still shocked to hear that the Supreme Court was set to reverse decades-old abortion precedents on May 2. This was the first leakage of a complete draft opinion in the Supreme Court’s 233-year history.

Pro-choice advocates were outraged. Some protestors began to demonstrate outside the houses of conservative justices, and others shared the addresses online.

Nicholas Roske, an activist from California, traveled to Justice Kavanaugh’s Chevy Chase home, Maryland with plans to assassinate the latter. Roske is currently in federal custody, awaiting trial.

The leak was not considered disinformation. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. released his official opinion in June that closely mirrored the draft.

One of his former clerks stated that Justice Alito was a target because he wrote the opinion.

The Rev. Robert L. Schenck is the president of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Institute. He was recently accused by Justice Alito, of leaking the result of the 2014 case Burwell V. Hobby Lobby Stores.

Justice Alito denied the accusation.

Megan Wold, who was a clerk to Justice Alito between 2014 and 2015, said that “it struck me as an intentional smear towards Justice Alito.”

She stated that those who do not like the decision of the justice in the abortion case are trying to pressure him. However, she does not believe it will be effective.

Mike Davis, President of the Article III Project, and a former clerk for Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, stated that it shouldn’t take long to solve the mystery of who leaked draft opinions, considering the limited number of people who had access.

Mr. Davis stated that it would be one the nine justices. However, I have doubts it is one of those nine justices. They must live together for the rest their lives. He said, “It would probably be one of four law clerks of each one of nine justices or two to three administrative assistants to each one of nine justices.” It’s a small group of people. It is almost certain that it is one of the 12 law clerks for one of three liberal justices. This is not difficult to find.