Press Release National
ICYMI
ICYMI: New Nondisclosure Rules Further Isolate the Supreme Court
ICYMI: New Nondisclosure Rules Further Isolate the Supreme Court
New York Times: How the Supreme Court Secretly Made Itself Even More Secretive
Last week, the New York Times reported that Chief Justice John Roberts began quietly requiring Supreme Court law clerks and staff to sign nondisclosure agreements after several noteworthy leaks—including the bombshell draft opinion of the devastating Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.
This move is part of a clear pattern of the Supreme Court repeatedly resisting meaningful oversight amid mounting ethics scandals, rapidly declining public trust, and growing demands for transparency and accountability.
Charged with upholding our fundamental constitutional protections, the Supreme Court already operates in relative secrecy—and enforcing legally binding contracts over longstanding norms only reaffirms this Court’s intent to further shield itself from oversight or scrutiny as it rubber-stamps Trump’s authoritarian agenda.
According to the Times, “Court employees see the justices’ maneuverings, their compromises, tensions and reversals. They read the memos and draft opinions that tell the story of how the law is really shaped. That includes the secret negotiations behind so-called “shadow docket” decisions, emergency orders the court issues often with little or no public rationale. Since Mr. Trump took office, the court has repeatedly issued such emergency orders, allowing him to implement his agenda.”
These are exactly the kinds of internal deliberations that carry sweeping implications for people’s lives, and the Court is now further insulating itself from public explanation. It’s no surprise that public approval of the Supreme Court is at an all-time low. As the Times reported, “‘The secrecy allows the justices to dismiss criticism on the grounds that outsiders don’t know or understand what’s happening behind the scenes,’ said Nikolas Bowie, a Harvard Law School professor who served as a clerk to Justice Sonia Sotomayor.”
Rather than implementing real change to restore trust, the Court adopted an empty code of ethics in 2023 that is entirely self-enforced. And it’s consistently fallen flat amid revelations of secret luxury vacations, undisclosed gifts, and justices openly aligning themselves with radical conservative ideology.
In his crusade to entrench his own absolute power, Trump has reshaped every branch of government by installing loyalists at every level, including the Supreme Court. It’s clear that the ultra-conservative, anti-abortion majority on the Court cannot be trusted to uphold the Constitution, defend our fundamental freedoms, or fulfill its duty as a check on executive overreach. This Court’s growing resistance to transparency underscores just how at odds it has become with the public it’s supposed to serve.
###
For over 55 years, Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly NARAL Pro-Choice America) has fought to protect and advance reproductive freedom at the federal and state levels—including access to abortion care, birth control, pregnancy and post-partum care, and paid family leave—for everybody. Reproductive Freedom for All is powered by its more than 4 million members from every state and congressional district in the country, representing the 8 in 10 Americans who support legal abortion.