Sonia Sotomayor & Neil Gorsuch issued a strange joint-denial on the mask story

On Tuesday, NPR had an interesting exclusive which turned into a much-discussed story. The NPR piece was broadly about the Supreme Court in disarray, and how even though Chief Justice John Roberts prizes good working relationships between the justices, there are many indications that there’s a lot of in-fighting and bickering. The part which got the most play was about how Sonia Sotomayor has diabetes and she asked Chief Justice Roberts to enforce a mask mandate during oral arguments, when all of the justices are in the same room together in somewhat close quarters. All of the justices agreed… except for Neil Gorsuch, who is assigned to sit next to Sotomayor. As such, Sotomayor is just teleworking now – she sits in her office and conferences in for oral arguments. Well, a funny thing happened after the story went viral: SCOTUS PR began to freak out.

Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor issued an unusual statement Wednesday asserting there is no tension on the high court around masking and stressing that Sotomayor did not ask Gorsuch to wear a mask while on the bench.

In the rare statement, the justices said that “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.”

The statement came just after the first set of oral arguments Wednesday. Gorsuch appeared, again, without a mask and Sotomayor participated remotely from her chambers, as she has done this month amid a surge in the Omicron variant of Covid-19.

Chief Justice John Roberts also issued a statement through the court’s press office, saying: “I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench.”

Roberts will have no additional comment, the court said.

Sotomayor has been participating in oral arguments remotely from her chambers because she doesn’t feel comfortable sitting on the bench near colleagues who are not masked, including Gorsuch, according to a source familiar with the situation. In addition, Sotomayor has been participating in the justices-only conference sessions remotely, a court spokeswoman confirmed. Those sessions — where only the nine are allowed, no staff or hangers-on — is where the justices debate and essentially determine the legal direction of the country.

Since January, amid the surge of the Omicron variant of the coronavirus, all of the justices have entered the chamber wearing masks, except for Gorsuch. In the ornate courtroom, he sits to Sotomayor’s left.

[From CNN]

Sidenote: I kind of wonder if Neil Gorsuch or one of his interns reads Celebitchy, because a commenter was in yesterday’s post, freaking out about how the NPR story was false and smugly yelling about this denial. As for the “denial” – it’s curiously worded, huh? “The reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false…” That wasn’t the reporting. NPR’s sources didn’t say Sotomayor asked Gorsuch to wear a mask. Sources said Sotomayor asked John Roberts to ask every justice to wear a mask, and only Gorsuch refused. And now Roberts is basically saying it’s out of his hands. Again, SCOTUS in disarray. I genuinely hope Joe Biden finds some way to pack the f–king courts.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

26 Responses to “Sonia Sotomayor & Neil Gorsuch issued a strange joint-denial on the mask story”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Seaflower says:

    Gorsuch should be the one to be remote. Talk about small p3nis move.

  2. Magick+Wanda says:

    If any Justice chooses not to wear a mask and the Chief Justice hasn’t the nerve/authority/desire to enforce that they do, then that Justice should be required to sit remotely. Why is a Justice who is doing the right thing and asking that others also do the right thing, the one to be exiled? Oh, that’s right. Because the conservatives control the court and they just do not care.

    • North of Boston says:

      And because she’s a woman, a minority and doesn’t vote hard line support for right wing patriarchal nationalism, with a side of faux-religious Church-state. They don’t want her voice in the room because they’re not going to
      listen to it anyway, US Constitution be damned.

    • Jennifer says:

      The better to kill her off?

  3. Scorpion says:

    Gorsuch has such a smug face that deserves to be slapped possibly with a mask. That’s my take on this.

  4. vs says:

    I wonder if the justices should be selected for life…..similarly with their political affiliation. I am not of the opinion that justices should be Independent; They are there to fully apply and interpret the Law and the constitution. On the constitution, there should be some rooms because after all, it was redacted by people who didn’t consider Black people as humans

    Something else, what is wrong with Clarence Thomas? why would a black man marry again with such a racist woman? was she racist when he met her? it is so weird

    • Colby says:

      I know someone who is friends with CT – they came up in law school together and is also a conservative black man. This person worked his butt off from nothing to make it to where he is, and he finds anything that says minorities are at a disadvantage as racist, as in the racism of low expectations, and it’s racist to group all black people together. The person I know also saw abuses of public safety nets when he was a public defender that really solidified his conservatism. I suspect CT is similar in his thought processes. All that to say, if CT as similar to the person I know, he may not feel like his wife is a racist, or he agrees with her POV.

      Not saying I agree with these points of view, necessarily, just presenting facts for context.

  5. Jezz says:

    The goof should wear a mask and clearly won’t. And there is no law that he must, so I bet they just ignore his insane rude selfishness. Also, why does this blogger have such loathing for commenters here? Always being such intolerance when someone doesn’t tow the party line. Makes me sad that the open collegiality of SCOTUS, even faced with human foibles and differences, can’t be enjoyed on a fun, smart celeb blog.

    • North of Boston says:

      “Open collegiality…” yes, SO collegial that NG is smugly refusing to take basic measures to minimize risk of exposing his colleagues to a potentially debilitating or even deadly disease.

      And JR is for some reason refusing to enact or enforce any workplace safety rules to protect the highest justices in the land or their co-workers. They can speak or publish all the well-measured, weighed, chosen words they like. But actions are speaking louder in this moment and at least on person on that bench is SHOWING very little care, regard, respect for his colleagues and the very important institution they all serve in.

      • Jezz says:

        But lots of Americans (bafflingly) don’t want to wear masks. I don’t get it, but they seem deeply committed to their own self interest and PERSONAL freedom. And wearing a mask is not the federal law. So while he is a selfish prick, he is doing his job — representing the people of America.
        I don’t agree, but I also don’t believe in hating those who are different. Open civil dialogue is the whole point, isn’t it?

      • Becks1 says:

        That’s a weird take. He IS being a selfish prick; he can do his job (interpreting the law) without being a selfish prick who is putting other people around him at risk. Maybe if more Republicans in highly visible positions like his wore masks, it would make a difference for those we encounter in our everyday lives and we would be closer to being out of this.

      • North of Boston says:

        I was responding specifically to your mention of the “open collegiality of SCOTUS”, pointing out that it’s not apparent from NG’s own actions. Open civil dialogue requires all parties involved to communicate in good faith.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Except there is a law. All federal employees must wear a mask when inside a federal facility. Supreme Court justices are federal employees. Shouldn’t be a question.
      Oh, wait. Thought a bit more on this. Biden instituted the mask mandate for federal employees in the executive branch, which would leave out SCOTUS. Never mind

  6. Rapunzel says:

    Last weekend, I had to get a rapid Covid test because I was exposed at work. I was negative, but there was a dude in front of me (6ft distance) with no mask. And I saw him get his result while I was waiting for mine. He was positive. We were outside and I had an n95 mask on but I think he went inside the medical facility to check in with no mask. Disgusting.

    Neil Gorsuch reminds me of this dude. I’ll bet Sotomayor was forced, by his whining, to release this statement.

  7. Anare says:

    They can spin their PR all they want, the facts speak for themselves. Roberts and Gorsuch are a couple of pathetic tools.

  8. Queen+Meghan’s+Hand says:

    And the NPR report did not say Roberts “requested” but *asked*.

  9. Onomo says:

    I wonder what their mask rules are. I wonder why all the justices choose to wear masks except for Gorsuch. I’m like who cares if they’re cordial to each other or not, the proof is in the fact that they don’t care for their colleague, who has type one diabetes, to test, to wear masks, and to create some sort of feasible policy for Sotomayor to feel safe, nor for those who are disabled to feel safe from covid. And PS people with disabilities are not disposable and are valued members of society. Jfc.

    I bet you anything If Neil, Amy and John had a disease like type 1 diabetes they would have argued for a mask mandate, and enforced vaccines. The constitution probably didn’t believe disabled lives were worth protecting and saving. Sigh. There are such clear limits of the constitution to understand lived experience.

  10. Willow says:

    Actions speak louder than words. Keep releasing all the PR statements you want. I’ll still pay attention to who wears a mask, who doesn’t, and who has to work remotely.

  11. tamsin says:

    This petty PR coming out to deny an observation about mask wearing makes me think the current make up of the Supreme Court is not to be trusted with sober, intelligent and fair consideration of the issues brought before them. It strikes me that there is such a lack of honesty, integrity, and true judicial acumen on this court, that it cannot be respected.

  12. Twin Falls says:

    A minority opinion CJ has zero authority because the only power the CJ has is to grant authorship on the majority’s opinion so yeah he didn’t ask anyone to wear a mask.

  13. BothSidesNow says:

    I think that NG not wearing a mask is a deliberate attempt at inconveniencing everyone BUT himself. As for Chief Roberts, why he is spineless in requiring all SCOTUS members to wear a mask is utterly disgusting.

    The current SCOTUS members consist of two male sexual predators and a bunch of hard on Repugnant’s that refuse to work to the best of their positions for ALL Americans. Until we lose a bunch of these hard core Repugnant’s and the sexual predators, our country isn’t safe for their decisions which will carry repercussions for decades, or longer.

  14. Marla Singer says:

    Pack the courts already!!! Replace a liberal judge with another liberal judge!! And I wish there were term limits!!! They should have to apply every decade for this position!!! No one should work for life!!!!!

  15. MissMarirose says:

    If Gorsuch were really a friend to Sotomayor, he would wear a mask to protect her from getting sick.

    But he won’t do it, so no PR statement or blog-commenting intern whinging about collegiality can prove otherwise. As Maya Angelou once said, “when people show you who they are, believe them.”

  16. molee says:

    So often those who refuse to extend the smallest courtesy to others, are also the ones who demand every accommodation and all entitlements for themselves. Ironically, many times they demand it from the very ones who they’ve previously denied! Maybe it’s time for the US Constitution to have a “Golden Rule” Amendment.

  17. bisynaptic says:

    iirc, there was nothing in the original report about sotomayor’s asking anyone about anything.

    • Jennifer says:

      I bet she didn’t bother to ask Gorsuch DIRECTLY because she knew it wouldn’t do any good. That is the subtle thing here.