Fallout continues from the Supreme Court leak heard ‘round the world. Who done it? What political moves will it yield? What is a baby? Can men get pregnant? These and other pressing questions are on the minds of millions of Americans.

First up, Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed that the leaked draft majority opinion was “authentic,” but he called the leak a “betrayal of the confidences of the Court” and “directed the Marshal of the Court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak.” Criminal prosecution could follow, though we’d bet there won’t be an FBI raid of the leaker’s home; that’s reserved for journalists who obtain Ashley Biden’s diary.

Roberts also reiterated that the opinion “does not represent a decision by the Court, or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.” The result can still change, in other words, which just happens to be precisely the reason for the leak. Roberts himself flipped on ObamaCare, and Anthony Kennedy infamously changed his vote and the result on the relevant case Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.

Sometimes-Republican Senator Susan Collins made comments that can certainly be seen as political pressure to change votes. “If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate,” she warned, “it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice [Neil] Gorsuch and Justice [Brett] Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings.” Collins has also said she’d support Democrat legislation to codify Roe.

Could the leaker have been on the conservative side? Theoretically, yes. Perhaps it was to shore up wobbly votes by appearing to bring pressure from the other side. Or perhaps to show “what might have been” had the Court followed Samuel Alito’s lead.

Far more likely, however, the leaker was on the Left — perhaps even with the tacit approval of a justice (cough, cough, Sonia Sotomayor?), though our bet is that there will be no justice’s fingerprints at the crime scene. Leftists have far less regard for institutional integrity because, for them, the ends justify the means. Leftist deep state saboteurs have been multiplying, and their leaks immediately become fodder for the Democrats’ Leftmedia propagandists.

Democrats also arguably have more to gain by inflaming a wedge issue to motivate their voters. Then again, no one should underestimate how a positive ruling will greatly encourage Republican voters. Indeed, “if it really were the case that overwhelming majorities of Americans wanted the same abortion rules that Planned Parenthood wants (meaning, essentially, none) then having the elected representatives of the people take up the question in the legislatures and vote on it seems like it would be a winning outcome for the pro-abortion side,” argues Kevin Williamson. “The fact that the pro-abortion side is terrified of working out the question democratically tells you that they know they do not have the support they claim to have.”

In fact, the polling on abortion and Roe is pretty muddy, largely because many Americans are ill-informed but also because Democrats have shifted from “safe, legal, and rare” to demanding the right to kill a child at birth. In spite of this radical change, the abortion rate has fallen to the lowest level since before Roe was decided in 1973.

But polling and statistics are also irrelevant as a matter of law.

As for what’s next, Democrats have certainly been reinvigorated to challenge the Senate filibuster and float packing the Court again.

Joe Biden called the leaked opinion “a radical decision” and refused to rule out supporting ending the Senate filibuster. “I’m not prepared to make those judgments now,” he said, “but, you know, I think the codification of Roe makes a lot of sense.” In other words, the ends justify the means.

Senator Bernie Sanders, who has become Biden’s model for presidential governance, likewise demanded an end to the filibuster: “Congress must pass legislation that codifies Roe v. Wade as the law of the land in this country NOW. And if there aren’t 60 votes in the Senate to do it, and there are not, we must end the filibuster to pass it with 50 votes.”

#Unity.

But the filibuster isn’t going anywhere if Senators Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema can help it. Both came out yesterday and reiterated their steadfast support for retaining it as “a protection of democracy.”

So how about packing the Court? We quoted Representative Ilhan Omar yesterday demanding it. Today, it’s Senator Ed Markey. “A stolen, illegitimate, and far-right Supreme Court majority appears set to destroy the right to abortion, an essential right which protects the health, safety, and freedom of millions of Americans,” Markey complained on Twitter. “There is no other recourse. We must expand the court.”

And here we thought claiming something was stolen and illegitimate would get someone banned from Twitter…

Now, let’s get to some of the really absurd commentary, compliments of Joe Biden.

“Roe says what all basic mainstream religions have historically included, that the existence of a human life and being is a question,” Biden pontificated. “Is it at the moment of conception? Is it six months? Is it six weeks?” Without answering, he went on, “The idea that we are going to make a judgment that is going to say that no one can make the judgment to choose to abort a child based on a decision by the Supreme Court, I think, goes way overboard.”

Hold the phone. Did he just say “abort a child”? A quick check of the transcript reveals that, yes, he did. We’re glad to see President Science acknowledge at least some part of the science, even while he was generally trying to deny it. Biden’s also wrong on the judgment question — overturning Roe doesn’t mean the Court has banned abortion. It simply returns the issue to the states. As for the religious position, Biden claims to be a good Catholic, but the Church’s official position is pro-life, beginning at conception.

To shed further light on Present Joe Biden’s position, let’s consult Past Joe Biden.

Back when Biden still had some connection to his professed faith, he declared: “I don’t like the Supreme Court decision or abortion. I think it went too far. I don’t think that a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body.” That was 1974. As late as 2006, he said: “I do not view abortion as a choice and a right. I think it’s always a tragedy.”

Finally, speaking of science, it wasn’t all that long ago that incoming Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Jackson Brown couldn’t even define what a woman is. How do women have rights if they themselves are undefinable? Yet here we have scads of Democrats wailing about the assault on a woman’s supposed “right to choose.” Every one of them suddenly seems to know what a woman is, and not one is talking about “birthing persons” or contending that men’s rights are at stake.

It’s funny how quickly the science can be settled in order to score political points.