Gorsuch Refused to Wear Mask in USSC, now Sotomayor won't attend hearings

[Mr Mannn]

https://conservativebrief.com/gorsuch-58171/?utm_source=CB&utm_medium=ProTrumpNews

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch apparently refused a request by Chief Justice John Roberts to wear a mask when the court is in session, in deference to liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who is diabetic.

According to NPR’s Nina Totenberg:

It was pretty jarring earlier this month when the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court took the bench for the first time since the omicron surge over the holidays. All were now wearing masks. All, that is, except Justice Neil Gorsuch. What’s more, Justice Sonia Sotomayor was not there at all, choosing instead to participate through a microphone set up in her chambers.

Sotomayor has diabetes, a condition that puts her at high risk for serious illness, or even death, from COVID-19. She has been the only justice to wear a mask on the bench since last fall when, amid a marked decline in COVID-19 cases, the justices resumed in-person arguments for the first time since the onset of the pandemic.

Now, though, the situation had changed with the omicron surge, and according to court sources, Sotomayor did not feel safe in close proximity to people who were unmasked. Chief Justice John Roberts, understanding that in some form asked the other justices to mask up.

They all did. Except for Gorsuch, who, as it happens, sits next to Sotomayor on the bench. His continued refusal since then has also meant that Sotomayor has not attended the justices’ weekly conference in person, joining instead by telephone.

Pandemic guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention note that either type of diabetes (and other preexisting conditions) makes the sufferer more susceptible to becoming severely ill from COVID-19.

“[Gorsuch’s] continued refusal since then has also meant that Sotomayor has not attended the justices’ weekly conference in person, joining instead by telephone,” Totenberg, who has long covered the high court for the taxpayer-supported media outlet, added.

Totenberg also noted that the court’s conservatives often clash with each other, adding that Justice Samuel Alito, at times, “barely contains his animosity” for Roberts.

She also noted that the court’s liberal minority is growing increasingly impatient and upset with the conservative majority over the prospect that Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion nationwide, could be overturned or severely limited at some point.

Most recently, the court’s factions clashed over the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, Totenberg noted. All six of the Republican-nominated justices agreed to strike down the mandate that required businesses with 100 or more workers to force employees to either get a vaccine or be subjected to weekly testing; the court’s three liberals dissented.

“When we are wise, we know enough to defer on matters like this one. When we are wise, we know not to displace the judgments of experts, acting within the sphere Congress marked out and under Presidential control, to deal with emergency conditions. Today, we are not wise,” the dissent noted.

But then, two of the court’s conservatives, Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, sided with the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for healthcare workers employed at facilities that accept federal Medicare and Medicaid funding.

Regarding Roe, one legal expert recently predicted that SCOTUS would decide to overturn the 1973 ruling after the court heard oral arguments in a Mississippi case significantly limiting abortions.

Frederick Morton, an executive fellow at the School of Public Policy and professor emeritus at the University of Calgary, noted in an op-ed:

“First, the Constitution is silent on the subject of abortion. The word does not appear anywhere in the document. The constitutional right to an abortion is a judicial creation. In Roe, the majority declared that such a right is protected by the right to privacy. These words also do not appear anywhere in the Constitution,” he added.

win/win

[Eupher]

Totenberg is a leftist, of course, who pretends to be a journalist. That said, I find it refreshing that Alito can barely stomach Roberts, who is worse than a leftist -- he pretends to be a conservative but again, the parallel between Roberts and the man who put him there - GWB - is startling.

Bush also pretends to be a conservative, but he caved to Laura on that issue a long time ago.

A whole lotta pretending going on, except for Laura. She's the only real one in the bunch. Oh, and Gorsuch too, who won't submit to the Covid panic porn. Good on him too.

[Drafe Hoblin]

More nothingness from NPR. 

That's like me reporting-on Gorsuch not understanding what Sotomayor is saying-thru-a-mask, because a source claims he's partially deaf. 

[Eupher]

More nothingness from NPR. 

That's like me reporting-on Gorsuch not understanding what Sotomayor is saying-thru-a-mask, because a source claims he's partially deaf.

I realize you're describing an analogy and an illustration in stupidity, but it's actually a truth. I'm hearing impaired, and when I don't have my hearing aids in my ears, I have a very difficult time understanding someone telling me something through a mask. Tells me I'm doing a lot of lip-reading.

Take the damned mask off, people. It's not helping you anyway.

[franksolich]

That bitch Nina Totenberg is still working for, and getting a big paycheck from, NPR?

Good Lord, I thought she was retired and gone a long time ago.

[enslaved1]

As I was getting out of the car for work, Sandi Rios was talking about this and said that Roberts never made the request.  Not finding a source this second, but she's usually pretty good about having support for what she says.

[SVPete]

  So Sotomator's mask isn't magic enough? And staying 10 or more feet from him isn't enough? Political theater.

[enslaved1]

As I was getting out of the car for work, Sandi Rios was talking about this and said that Roberts never made the request.  Not finding a source this second, but she's usually pretty good about having support for what she says.

Found the article.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2022/01/19/justices-roberts-gorsuch-sotomayor-blow-nprs-masking-lie

The day after NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg laid an egg with a report suggesting conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch was spitefully ignoring requests from Chief Justice John Roberts (conservative) and Justice Sonia Sotomayor (liberal) to wear a mask in oral arguments, every party named in the report publicly declared it to be patently untrue. And despite these public comments, NPR and Totenberg spent Wednesday hanging on tightly to the lie.

According to Totenberg’s original reporting, “Chief Justice John Roberts, understanding that [Sotomayor has diabetes and frets about COVID-19], in some form asked the other justices to mask up. They all did. Except Gorsuch, who, as it happens, sits next to Sotomayor on the bench.”

This report was picked up by many zealous liberal outlets and was praised by CNN’s Reliable Sources newsletter as “NPR's incredibly well-sourced … scoop…”

But in a joint statement, on Wednesday, Gorsuch, and Sotomayor not only rebuked NPR’s claims about what was said but affirmed their friendship: “Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false. While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends.”

[DLR Pyro]

But in a joint statement, on Wednesday, Gorsuch, and Sotomayor not only rebuked NPR’s claims about what was said but affirmed their friendship: “Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false. While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends.”

Will social media platforms rush to ban this totenberg flake as well as npr for spreading false and misinformation regarding covid and masks?

will npr lose their taxpayer funding because they are not credible?

[Ralph Wiggum]

Will social media platforms rush to ban this totenberg flake as well as npr for spreading false and misinformation regarding covid and masks?

will npr lose their taxpayer funding because they are not credible?

That crazy scrunt Totenberg is claiming that the Supreme Court Justices (Roberts, Sotamayor, and Gorsuch) are lying and stands by her "reporting".

[Eupher]

That crazy scrunt Totenberg is claiming that the Supreme Court Justices (Roberts, Sotamayor, and Gorsuch) are lying and stands by her "reporting".

She's been at NPR since 1975 and thus is "untouchable" by the editors and the management. Her response to Kelly McBride, who is some sort of "media ethics" expert and is referenced as an "ombudsman" in this exchange:

“She can write any ******* thing she wants, whether or not I think it’s true,” Totenberg told The Daily Beast on Thursday night.

If this isn't arrogance personified (what the hell does "in some form" mean, Nina?), I don't know what is. But then again, Totenberg is - like pretty much all of NPR - leftist.

Hot Air

[Ptarmigan]

Very rare for the Supreme Court to issue a statement. NPR is fake news.