Justice Department Steps Up Dobbs Leak Probe With Grand Jury Subpoenas

The Justice Department has stepped up its criminal investigation into the 2022 leak of the Supreme Court draft opinion that overturned Roe v. Wade, issuing grand jury subpoenas and seeking testimony from people who worked at the court when the draft was disclosed. The move, first reported by The New York Times on Thursday, is the most aggressive step yet to identify who handed the draft to the press, more than four years after the leak stunned Washington.

The inquiry is overseen by Jeanine Pirro, the US Attorney for the District of Columbia and a close ally of President Donald Trump, with career prosecutors and her top deputy, Carlton Davis. A department spokesperson declined to comment.

Key Points

• The Justice Department has stepped up its criminal investigation into the 2022 leak of the Supreme Court draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, first reported by The New York Times on Thursday.
• Federal prosecutors have issued grand jury subpoenas and seek testimony from people who worked at the court when the draft was disclosed; the inquiry has accelerated in recent weeks.
• US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, a Trump ally, oversees the inquiry with career prosecutors and her top deputy, Carlton Davis.
• The leak concerns Justice Samuel Alito’s draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, published by Politico on May 2, 2022, nearly two months before the final ruling.
• It is unclear what crime prosecutors allege: no federal statute specifically criminalises leaking Supreme Court draft opinions, and no suspect has been identified.

What Happened

The New York Times reported on Thursday that the Justice Department has stepped up a criminal investigation into the leak of the draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that ended the constitutional right to abortion. The New York Post and the Washington Examiner confirmed the development, and federal prosecutors have issued grand jury subpoenas seeking testimony from people who worked at the Supreme Court when the draft was disclosed.

The use of grand jury subpoenas had not previously been reported. Then-FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino said in May 2025 that the administration was pursuing the matter, but mentioned no subpoenas. It is not yet known how many subpoenas have been issued, who received them, or whether anyone has already testified. The department has not said what prompted the recent acceleration, and the Supreme Court has not commented.

Background and Context

The leak was one of the most extraordinary breaches in the modern history of the Supreme Court. On May 2, 2022, Politico published a draft majority opinion by Justice Samuel Alito in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, challenging a Mississippi law banning most abortions after 15 weeks. The draft showed a majority ready to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision establishing a constitutional right to abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision reaffirming it.

The court issued its final ruling on June 24, 2022, holding 6-3 that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion and returning the issue to the states. Since then, about a dozen states have enacted near-total bans, while others have protected access. Chief Justice John Roberts ordered an internal investigation, calling the leak a “singular and egregious breach” of trust. The court’s marshal interviewed 97 employees and clerks, all of whom signed affidavits denying responsibility, but the inquiry ended in January 2023 without identifying the leaker.

Dobbs Leak Investigation: What Prosecutors Face

The investigation faces an unusual legal problem: no federal statute specifically criminalises leaking a Supreme Court draft opinion. Unlike classified national defence information, covered by the Espionage Act, a draft judicial opinion is not classified material, and no law clearly makes its disclosure a crime.

It is unclear what offence prosecutors believe was committed, whether they are examining other charges such as theft of government property or obstruction, or whether the grand jury is mainly a tool to compel testimony. Prosecutors may also examine whether anyone lied to investigators earlier, which can itself be a crime. The inquiry also raises separation-of-powers questions, since a Justice Department investigation of the court’s staff is an unusual exercise of executive power over a co-equal branch.

Reactions and Quotes

The Justice Department has not confirmed the investigation. A spokesperson declined to comment, saying the department does not comment on the existence of ongoing investigations, its standard position, which gives no indication of whether charges are contemplated or anyone is a target.

The administration’s interest is not new: Bongino said in May 2025 that it was pursuing the matter. Pirro, a former judge and television host appointed by President Trump, leads one of the most politically sensitive US Attorney’s offices in the country, with Davis working the case alongside career prosecutors. The Supreme Court has not commented.

Why It Matters

The leak struck at the heart of how the Supreme Court works. Its deliberations are confidential by design, and draft opinions circulate among the justices and their clerks on the understanding they stay private until the court speaks. The Dobbs disclosure broke that understanding in the most consequential case in a generation, while the case was still pending.

A successful investigation would resolve a mystery hanging over the court for more than four years and set a precedent: never before has the Justice Department used the grand jury process over a Supreme Court draft. The timing matters politically, too, with the inquiry accelerating in the final weeks of Republican control of Congress and abortion still central to American politics.

What Happens Next

Prosecutors will use the grand jury to compel testimony and documents from people who worked at the court in 2022. Recipients can be required to appear and answer under oath, and further subpoenas may follow. Whether charges result depends on the testimony and whether prosecutors can identify a specific offence.

The court’s response will be closely watched: it has not said whether it will cooperate or assert privilege over internal communications. The justices were not interviewed in the internal investigation, and it is unknown whether prosecutors will seek testimony from any current or former justice.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was leaked in the Dobbs case?
A draft majority opinion by Justice Samuel Alito showing a majority ready to overturn Roe v. Wade, published by Politico on May 2, 2022, nearly two months before the final ruling.

Who is leading the new investigation?
US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, a Trump ally, with career prosecutors and her top deputy, Carlton Davis.

What are grand jury subpoenas?
Legal orders compelling people to testify before a grand jury or produce documents, used to gather evidence and decide whether to bring charges.

Was the leaker ever found?
No. The court’s internal investigation interviewed 97 employees and clerks who signed affidavits denying responsibility, and ended in January 2023 without identifying the leaker.

Is leaking a Supreme Court draft a crime?
It is unclear. No federal statute specifically criminalises leaking Supreme Court draft opinions.

Read more on US News Pulse: the Ninth Circuit’s decision to pause an Idaho abortion health ruling, and President Trump’s move to nominate ousted Texas Justice James Sullivan to the federal bench.