The US Supreme Court could overturn the constitutional right to abortion, according to a leaked draft opinion.
Politico on Monday night published a draft majority opinion that it had obtained striking down the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which guaranteed the right to abortion nationwide.
Within hours of Politico's publication a crowd was calling on Democrats in Congress to take action to protect access to abortion, while decrying a possible ruling that would take away what they see as a fundamental right.
"The first line in the draft is that this is a moral issue," Annie McDonnell, 19, a student at George Washington University, said, referring to the draft opinion. "If it's a moral issue, you shouldn't be depriving us of our choice."
Abortion is one of the most divisive issues in US politics and has been for nearly a half century. A 2021 poll by the Pew Research Center found that 59% of US adults believed it should be legal in all or most cases, while 39% thought it should be illegal in most or all cases.
While the substance of the draft sparked praise from anti-abortion conservatives and Republicans and condemnation from abortion rights advocates and Democrats, many court watchers blasted the leak itself.
The leak of a draft opinion is a major breach of confidentiality that has heightened the stakes in an already politically-charged case, experts say.
They predicted chaos inside the court and unpredictable consequences, whose longstanding tradition of confidentiality and trust surrounding its deliberations helps lend the institution its remove from the political branches of government.
The Supreme Court typically keeps its internal deliberations private.
"This is the equivalent of the Pentagon Papers leak, but at the Supreme Court," Neal Katyal, a former acting US Solicitor General, who argues frequently before the court, said in a Twitter post.
He was referring to secret US documents on the Vietnam War published by the New York Times in 1971.
The widely followed SCOTUSblog wrote on its Twitter account: "It's impossible to overstate the earthquake this will cause inside the court, in terms of the destruction of trust among the justices and staff."
"Leaking a draft opinion is a massive violation of settled norms. It just doesn't happen," tweeted Dan Epps, a professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, adding that the culprit likely "would be someone who is upset" about what the court is doing.
Ilya Shapiro, a lecturer at the Georgetown University Law Center, posted that the leaker is "someone on the left engaged in civil disobedience" and called the leak "inexcusable and threatens the court's functioning."
While a number of commentators said the person who leaked the draft is probably seeking to whip up the public to change the justices' minds or get progressive voters to the polls for the November 8 congressional midterm elections, others disagreed, asserting the leaker might be someone - a clerk or even a justice - who sympathises with the majority.
Such a person would be "worried (in a slightly crazy way) about locking that majority down, and willing to take the extreme step of leaking to advance that goal," said Joseph Fishkin, a professor at the University of California Los Angeles.
There will be a "great deal of anxiety" over reports relating to a "draft opinion" suggesting the US Supreme Court could overturn abortion rights in America, International Trade Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan has said.
She told Sky News: "With leaked documents you never quite know, so let's wait and see, but I am certainly a woman who believes in choice for women and when the Roe versus Wade ruling came through decades ago now ... it's part of our history that acceptance that actually women should have control of their bodies was something that set a standard for the rest of the world and allowed women to be empowered in this very, very critical way.
"So, we'll wait and see ... whether this is a true document or not, but I think there will be a great deal of anxiety if that seems to be true, and I suppose if it goes back to a state-by-state level, the US will have to deal with that in a different way."
She added: "Issues of concern are always raised through diplomatic channels whatever they might be, they are done privately often because that can be a most effective way of setting out the view.
"It's a matter of great concern, I think, to all women in the US if this is a rowing back on a 50-year state of things, but we'll have to wait and see whether it's true of not."
This is not the first time an opinion has been leaked before its intended release, according to Jonathan Peters, a law professor at the University of Georgia School of Law.
He said that the New York Tribune reported the outcome in an 1852 case involving the Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Company 10 days before the court issued the decision.
Peters noted that other leaks have commented on decisions after their release or on personal relationships and conflicts among the justices.
In January National Public Radio reported that due to a surge in COVID-19 infections the justices had been asked to wear masks but only Neil Gorsuch refused, prompting a denial by the court.
Some observers said that the controversy, which is certain to persist, could distract from the court's actions on the right to abortion.
Law professor Rick Hasen said the development actually helps the majority that overturns Roe v. Wade by deflecting commentary to breach of court secrecy norms and by "lessening the blow by setting expectations."
