Experts caution that recent Supreme Court revelations are highly damaging.

The publication of private memoranda and conversations between Supreme Court justices in the New York Times has led legal experts to warn that such sensitive leaks are damaging to the high court.

The New York Times reported that internal memos and deliberations revealed that Chief Justice Thomas had "shaped" the outcomes of three significant cases the court heard involving January 6th rioters and granted former President Donald Trump immunity for presidential actions.

The report alleges that Roberts provided crucial support for the historic immunity hearing and made last-minute, unexplained changes to the authorship of politically charged opinions.

The leak of the Dobbs opinion draft, which overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, was followed by a determined effort by Democratic lawmakers and the Biden administration to make significant changes to the court and ethics enforcement.

Republican senators, including Lindsey Graham and John Kennedy, argue that the court's efforts are politically motivated to delegitimize its current majority of Republican-appointed justices.

Some legal experts believe that the latest leak is part of an effort to weaken the Supreme Court.

James Burnham, president of Vallecito Capital and former Justice Department official, believes it is highly damaging to the court when individuals within the court reveal confidential memoranda, emails, and what seem to be remarks made at the justices' conference to the press, as he stated in an interview with Planet Chronicle Digital.

The justices cannot be candid with each other if they believe that their conversations could be published in the New York Times, which will lead to less communication among them. This will affect their ability to deliberate openly, ultimately weakening the court's decision-making process.

The Chief Justice and the other justices in the majority were unfairly criticized in the decision, according to him.

Carrie Seveino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, stated that "if anyone on the Court deserves censure for being overly political in this case, it's the person who leaked" the "highly confidential internal" documents.

The continued left-wing PR campaign against the Court is consistent with the incident.

Some justices have been targeted more than others in an attempt to discredit the Court as an institution, she stated.

John Shu, a constitutional attorney who worked in both Bush administrations, believes that the leaks are politically motivated and are intended to keep Roberts in the center or push him towards center-left during the upcoming term, particularly if Trump is elected in November.

"The Chief Justice, as the head of the Supreme Court, has the authority to assign opinions and possesses administrative power that other justices do not have, according to Shu. Similarly, the President represents Article 2, while the Chief Justice embodies Article 3."

Shu expressed concern that another norm has been broken, compromising the confidentiality of discussions and the drafting of opinions.