May 5, 2022 --

New York Times columnist Bret Stephens began his May 4 column by acknowledging that the Roe v. Wade  decision was "ill-judged."  He went on to comment that, among other negatives  in its wake, Senate confirmation hearings on Supreme Court nominations have become "unholy death matches." And yet, he called on Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Barrett, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Thomas to sustain Roe, speculating that reversal of the ruling on abortion would "replicate Roe's damage."

LPR wonders why Stephens addressed the chief justice, who is generally conceded to have joined the liberal bloc fiercely opposed to reversal of Roe, its assault on the Constitution notwithstanding. 

There is some speculation that the leak was intended to tamp down outrage, giving activists the chance to cool down before reversal of Roe was officially handed down.  Should that explain the leak, wouldn't Chief Justice Roberts want to contain the expected outrage from the left?  Could the leak, then, be an indication of Machiavellianism at the Supreme Court by its leader?   (If a member of the Court were the leaker, Justice Breyer would have the least to lose given his [political] retirement at the end of this term.)