Should the Media Seek to Use the Supreme Court Leak to “Reframe” News Business?

The public could suffer if the media information and stories look to highlight certain narratives.

The U.S. Supreme Court only can operate on trust among the justices and their staff. That trust was severely broken with the recent leak to Politico of a preliminary decision that looks to reverse the Roe v. Wade ruling of 1973. Roe not only mandated legalized abortion everywhere, it overturned the abortion laws of all 50 states, even those where it already was legal.

The Supreme Court only can function if its deliberations remain secret. Otherwise, leaks like this lead to pressure, maybe even violence, against the justices. That means mob rule instead of the rule of an orderly democratic process.

Yet some news outlets have downplayed the danger of the leak. The Washington Post headlined, “Abortion Case Leak Shows That the Supreme Court Is Broken.” The claim could be made that the media coverage is equally as broken. Specifically, Politico took possession of stolen goods, the court’s preliminary document, and published it.

Poynter, which reports on the news business itself, even wrote, “Newsrooms must reframe abortion coverage and the worn-out debate around the rules of objectivity.” But if newsrooms aren’t objective, how are they different from the press releases from activist groups?

The news business has suffered serious downturns in recent years due to new media offering alternatives. That’s even more true with Elon Musk buying Twitter and promising to return it to its free-speech roots.