Supreme Court analyst on possible reason SCOTUS pulled abortion document

The the court describing this as a document and not an actual opinion. If this document largely matches the opinion when it's released, why wasn't the opinion then just released today? OK, I think that's a great question. And this is what sometimes will happen is that they'll be close to issuing it and someone feels like it needs to be pulled back. Opinions on occasion are pulled back for, you know, maybe in this case. I bet it's something in the dissent when the justices dismiss the case as improvidently granted. Often they do that in just one sentence. The majority in this case would be just saying we dismiss this case as improvidently granted. Perhaps any of the six, the likely six in the majority might be writing some sort of concurrence to explain. They often do not do that. But let's just say for purposes of argument about what was not completely done here, even though it appears that we really do know the outcome. But let's just say that either, you know, those of justices who were in the majority, the chief justices Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Elena Katanji Brown Jackson, that would be the liberals and then key conservatives, they're the ones who believe that this case had been improvidently granted, that means accepted on appeal. And they might, they might be writing some explanation. As I said, normally you just get that one sentence dismissed as improvidently granted. But in this case, since according to Bloomberg, we know who the three dissenters are from that Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito, they likely under most circumstances would have wanted to say something about that. They would have been, you know, this case was argued the last week in April. And I presume that the reason we didn't get this order dismissing this case as improvidently granted soon after is that those 3 dissenters had something to say about it, and something probably quite angrily to say about why the justices should have actually handled this case. And probably given what they, those 3 individuals said during oral arguments, they probably think Idaho should prevail here, that Idaho, Idaho should be able to completely ban any abortions, even in emergency rooms, unless it's to prevent a woman's death, not in regards to just her health, to prevent a woman's death. So possibly. And Boris and Brianna, I am just, you know, speculating what the problem was today or what the problem's been over these last couple months when they hadn't ruled, is that those three people were writing a dissent. And maybe it appeared that that that dissenting opinion was finished, but for one reason or another, it got pulled back. Or maybe, as I say, there could have been some other writings. So that would be why this happened. Now, you know, they've obviously laid the blame here at what did they say the the document production unit that, you know, that put post these things that it's probably not a good day for that team at all. But there obviously was some miscommunication. And as you 2 both know, today was a very unusual day at the Supreme Court where they issued only two opinions. So it's likely this one could have been ready and slotted for today. But whoever pulled it back didn't get the message to everyone, apparently. And, and as Bloomberg says, at least according to its report, it was up only briefly. And as far as we know, no other news organization had spotted it. And I have to say our team and teams across America and anybody who knows how the court works would have been on that website this morning looking to see what opinions were released.