comment: >
  
  This is a planted story to cover for the fact that one of the judges leaked the Dobbs decision. They weren't hacked or something.
context: A burn bag is a security bag that holds sensitive or classified documents which are to be destroyed by fire or pulping after a certain period of time. The most common usage of burn bags is by government institutions, in the destruction of classified materials.
  If anybody didn't know, I had to look it up myself >
  
  I work for a bank-like company that has to meet strict financial-services industry security compliance. We have big locked, closed trash bins with slots in the top around the office. If you have documents containing PII (personally identifying information) about customers or other data subject to security protocols, you slide the documents in the slot, and a secure shredding company shows up periodically, takes those bins for shredding and replaces them with empty ones. 
  How hard could this be for the SCOTUS?
  Edit: a commenter elsewhere pointed out that these types of bins can't be used for classified documents. My point wasn't that this particular solution would work for the SCOTUS but that there are well established, tried-and-true mechanisms that they could adopt appropriate to the info that they need to protect. The SCOTUS is just winging it when every other agency that handles classified documents uses such methods and protocols. >
  
  You cannot use those for classified documents. >
  
  You cant use secure bins but you can leave them in a bag open in a hallway? >
  
  You could if you hired a company with the appropriate clearance to take control and shred it. But something like the nsa has so many caveats and specific projects that it is a bit more complicated. But yes, there do exist many better ways than leaving a bag in the hall. >
  
  But the hall method is so secure. >
  
  And oh so convenient! >
  
  “This has been going on for years,” one former employee said. >
  
  So the SCOTUS is widely understood by staff to be a lawless place? What a molestation of our legal system. >
  
  No accountability means no need to follow laws.  Who's going to prosecute them? >
  
  Again, fucking TERM LIMITS. How is this not a given? They are unelected officials. If anyone should have a term limit, it is those who have not been elected by the people. These fucks are more powerful and untouchable than any sitting president, any elected congressman or order government official from city to state to federal government, while they quietly steer our country without accountability. >
  
  That doesn't fix the problem of zero accountability. >
  
  Pepperidge Farms remembers just a few years ago there were loud call to lock people up for doing work from personal emails...
  Of course, those same people were silent before and after the lock-up calls when it was their people doing work from personal emails...