It has been nearly four weeks since the Washington Post reported the leak from the Supreme Court, and we still are nowhere closer to the truth. That is four weeks of protests by groups favoring Roe Vs. Wade and the ongoing saga of our Supreme Court justices being in danger from overzealous radicals. I am not sure which is worse and more volatile for the country. The decision on Roe Vs. Wade published by the Court, the name of the leaker, or the assignment of permanent protection for the Justices are all volatile and sure to set off more protesting.

Like everything in Washington, the search for the person or persons responsible for destroying over 200 years of credibility in our Judicial Branch has to be a monumental process. The job of heading up the investigation goes to Gail Curley, Marshall of the U.S. Supreme Court and head of the Court Police Force.

People who know Curley, 53, described the former Army colonel and military lawyer as possessing the right temperament for a highly charged leak investigation: smart, private, apolitical, and unlikely to be intimidated. The last trait is probably most important in the politically charged and divided Capitol. She must work quickly as this needs to be resolved before the Court releases the Opinion.

There is a very small pool of people in the Court from which the leaker needs to be extracted. There are roughly eighty people that would have had access to the leaked document. Those eighty include the Justices, clerks, and staff. With the security protocols, you would think the guilty individual would be easily uncovered. Not so. One strategy may be to use perjury as a tool to unmask the person who destroyed the credibility of the Supreme Court.

If the Marshal, at the Chief Justice’s direction, asks each person to sign a statement saying they did not leak the document and sign it under penalty of perjury, and it turns out someone lies, then they’re guilty of a [18 USC §] 1001 violation,” Smith told the DCNF, referring to a law against making false statements to certain government officials during investigations. “It’s a felony. The charges would be fairly significant.”

The expected Opinion will be released soon and will create its own firestorm of protests across the country. It would be best if the leak situation were resolved and allowed to work its way through the news cycle. The Opinion does not need any more fuel thrown on its fire.

The other element is that nobody in Washington ever gets held to accountability. Some situations may border on or cross the line into criminality. People will be investigated. There will be hearings in both houses. Time will pass, and so will the story until it is forgotten. Lois Lerner is a perfect example. She was integral in the IRS targeting certain political groups. Everyone knew Lerner was guilty, yet she was allowed to retire with her pension. She helped crush legitimate political action groups because they did not align with the Democrat dogma, and she is enjoying a nice retirement on our dime.

We do not need a dead-end investigation or another Lois Lerner. We need someone to do time for violation against us, the people. Let’s find and put away the leaker for a long time.