Thank God for Norma Leah Nelson McCorvey's lawyers . . .

Whoa, a superprecedence event ( the “leak” of a “swinging for the fences,” “a 21 gun salute,” of “a withering takedown” of Roe v. Wade in a February 10, 2022 draft majority opinion in this decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization ) has me feeling like I'm spiraling, reeling ( and almost any of the 58 other synonyms for reeling ) back to the early '70s of the 20th century, remembering all of the energy I put into insuring a woman's right to choose, to have control over their own body, beating ( for once ) what is and has been the Republican patriarchy's mantra - “keep them barefoot and pregnant” - without hope of equality . . . ( in other words, as Jung suggests, “their jealousy of a woman's power to give birth” ).

And, only because it's a draft version, I'm not going to get suckered into mourning what might turn out to be the loss of this almost 50 year victory for democracy, but rather just put the following three proposed theories out there for you to discuss as to the question:  “Why the leak?” ( much thanks goes to New York University Law Professor Melissa Murray for setting me on this path ).

One theory, as unlikely as it is, is that the draft decision could have been leaked by one ( or more ) of the three ( or, perhaps, four ) dissenting judges.

A second theory, is that it could have been leaked by someone “in the middle,” wanting to stress test how a decision like this would play out in the public space.

Or, finally, it may have been leaked by one of the five ( or, perhaps, six ) majority justices who fears that there could be defectors from the majority opinion.  This is a way to backwalk the majority justices into a corner and make certain that they stay “on sides” in the “absolutist decision” that “takes no prisoners” and “really undermines and eviscerates” all of Roe v. Wade ( not to mention the possiblility of a whole series of other “rights” which rely on Roe v. Wade [ and its history ] and could be decided in the same way ).

Have at it ( in the "Enter Comment" section [ below ], if you feel up to it )!