No answers in leaked draft abortion ruling inquiry

Investigators into how a Wisconsin Supreme Court abortion order was leaked last year said it was likely deliberate but were unable to determine who was responsible.

On June 26, 2024, reporter Jack Kelly published an article on WisconsinWatch.org that included revealing unreleased information from the draft order in a case brought by Planned Parenthood, which was seeking to declare abortion a right protected by the Wisconsin Constitution. About a week later, the Supreme Court issued an order accepting the case.

The Supreme Court’s seven justices, in a statement released with the investigative report, called the leak “a breach of trust the court had not experienced in its history.” All seven justices condemned the leak.

As part of the investigative process, 62 people were interviewed, including Supreme Court justices, judicial staff, Supreme Court commissioners, interns and other personnel who accessed the Justice Chambers between June 13 and June 26. In addition to the interviews, network logs, including individual web histories, shared folder files, individual folders and emails from all employees with access to the draft order were reviewed. Printer data was analyzed to identify who may have printed the leaked draft order

“All available leads have been thoroughly pursued, and no suspects have been positively identified at this time,” the report said. There was no evidence that the leak was the result of a breach of the court’s computer system.

The leaked order came in one of two abortion-related cases being considered by the court. The court also heard a second case challenging the state’s 1849 abortion ban brought by Attorney General Josh Kaul. A ruling is pending in that case. The court has yet to set a date for oral arguments in the Planned Parenthood case, which was the subject of the leaked memo.

The report said missing computer data hindered the investigation, with logs showing websites visited in the two weeks leading up to the Wisconsin Watch article being published were incomplete. Logs were available only for June 26 to June 27, but not from June 13 to June 26, which was the original request.

The lack of the visitation logs “significantly hampered the ability to thoroughly examine the circumstances surrounding the leak. The issue underscores the importance of proper data management, retention, and verification procedures, especially when such information is crucial for ongoing investigations,” the report said.

The report revealed the draft order had been forwarded to the personal email account of Justine Ann Walsh Bradley. Her law clerk told investigators that forwarding important documents to that account was standard operating procedure.

Investigator details

Three retired detectives conducted the independent investigation: Andrew Jicha, Mark Gralinski and David Feyen. The total cost of the investigation was $165,740, which is being covered through the Supreme Court’s budget.

“Integrity is the lifeblood of our court system, and we take threats to that integrity very seriously,” said Director of State Courts Audrey Skwierawski. “Our responsibility now is to respond to and learn from the challenges identified through the investigation. This report gives us an important opportunity to strengthen the systems that support our courts and the public we serve.”

Skwierawski said her office is establishing an “Judicial Operations Integrity Task Force” to review the report’s recommendations and propose long-term strategies that can reduce the risk of similar incidents in the future.