SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch stands during a group photo of the Justices at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. on April 23, 2021. (Photo: Erin Schaff/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
Gorsuch Chooses to Go Maskless While Backing Forced Pregnancy for Women in Texas
"I feel like we're entitled to expect our Supreme Court justices to be better role models. Or, at least, to have an ounce of decency," said one observer.
Jan 18, 2022
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch's reported refusal to wear a mask at in-person proceedings--while his colleague and liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor attended remotely due to health concerns--sparked backlash Tuesday, especially in the context of the Court's current attack on women's reproductive health.
According to reporting Tuesady by NPR, citing "court sources," the refusal by Gorsuch--who was appointed by former President Donald Trump and sits next to Sotomayor on the bench--came despite Chief Justice John Roberts having asked the justices to wear masks in light of the specific vulnerability of Sotomayor, who has diabetes, to Covid-19. On Wednedsay, Gorsuch and Sotomayor issued a rate joint statement in which they said the reporting was inaccurate.
"Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false," the justices said in the statement. "While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends."
The CDC says having diabetes can make a person more likely to get severely ill from Covid-19, and Sotomayor has been wearing a mask at in-person proceedings since last fall.
Amid the surge in Omicron cases, according to NPR, "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."
The reporting provoked widespread rebuke of Gorsuch.
"That Justice Sotomayor is choosing to participate in #SCOTUS arguments remotely because Justice Gorsuch (and *only* Justice Gorsuch) refuses to wear a mask on the bench is such a perfect microcosm of how millions of Americans are experiencing the pandemic--from both perspectives," tweeted law professor Steve Vladeck.
"Personally," said former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance in response to the reporting, "I feel like we're entitled to expect our Supreme Court justices to be better role models. Or, at least, to have an ounce of decency. Putting on a mask would have cost Gorsuch nothing, but then he didn't care about risk to front line workers, either."
Journalist Sarah Burris tied Gorsuch's mask refusal to his anti-choice record.
"So Gorsuch was miffed he felt like he was being 'forced' to wear a mask... but he's about to say women should be forced to carry a dangerous pregnancy to term," she tweeted.
Currently, reproductive health experts and pro-choice advocates are furious with the right-wing majority of Justices on the court who have refused to halt a state law in Texas that bars abortions after just 6 weeks of pregnancy.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said last month it was "outrageous" for the court to "not to block Texas' unconstitutional abortion ban." The people of Texas, she said, "are harmed every day this law is allowed to stand."
The reporting about Gorsuch's refusal to mask, though now in doubt given the joint statement from he and Sotomayor, comes just days after the Supreme Court's right-wing majority struck down the Biden administration's vaccine-or-test mandate for large private employers.
Correction/Update: This article has been updated from its original to account for the new statement from Sotomayor and Gorsuch issued on Wednesday, January 19.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch's reported refusal to wear a mask at in-person proceedings--while his colleague and liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor attended remotely due to health concerns--sparked backlash Tuesday, especially in the context of the Court's current attack on women's reproductive health.
According to reporting Tuesady by NPR, citing "court sources," the refusal by Gorsuch--who was appointed by former President Donald Trump and sits next to Sotomayor on the bench--came despite Chief Justice John Roberts having asked the justices to wear masks in light of the specific vulnerability of Sotomayor, who has diabetes, to Covid-19. On Wednedsay, Gorsuch and Sotomayor issued a rate joint statement in which they said the reporting was inaccurate.
"Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false," the justices said in the statement. "While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends."
The CDC says having diabetes can make a person more likely to get severely ill from Covid-19, and Sotomayor has been wearing a mask at in-person proceedings since last fall.
Amid the surge in Omicron cases, according to NPR, "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."
The reporting provoked widespread rebuke of Gorsuch.
"That Justice Sotomayor is choosing to participate in #SCOTUS arguments remotely because Justice Gorsuch (and *only* Justice Gorsuch) refuses to wear a mask on the bench is such a perfect microcosm of how millions of Americans are experiencing the pandemic--from both perspectives," tweeted law professor Steve Vladeck.
"Personally," said former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance in response to the reporting, "I feel like we're entitled to expect our Supreme Court justices to be better role models. Or, at least, to have an ounce of decency. Putting on a mask would have cost Gorsuch nothing, but then he didn't care about risk to front line workers, either."
Journalist Sarah Burris tied Gorsuch's mask refusal to his anti-choice record.
"So Gorsuch was miffed he felt like he was being 'forced' to wear a mask... but he's about to say women should be forced to carry a dangerous pregnancy to term," she tweeted.
Currently, reproductive health experts and pro-choice advocates are furious with the right-wing majority of Justices on the court who have refused to halt a state law in Texas that bars abortions after just 6 weeks of pregnancy.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said last month it was "outrageous" for the court to "not to block Texas' unconstitutional abortion ban." The people of Texas, she said, "are harmed every day this law is allowed to stand."
The reporting about Gorsuch's refusal to mask, though now in doubt given the joint statement from he and Sotomayor, comes just days after the Supreme Court's right-wing majority struck down the Biden administration's vaccine-or-test mandate for large private employers.
Correction/Update: This article has been updated from its original to account for the new statement from Sotomayor and Gorsuch issued on Wednesday, January 19.
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch's reported refusal to wear a mask at in-person proceedings--while his colleague and liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor attended remotely due to health concerns--sparked backlash Tuesday, especially in the context of the Court's current attack on women's reproductive health.
According to reporting Tuesady by NPR, citing "court sources," the refusal by Gorsuch--who was appointed by former President Donald Trump and sits next to Sotomayor on the bench--came despite Chief Justice John Roberts having asked the justices to wear masks in light of the specific vulnerability of Sotomayor, who has diabetes, to Covid-19. On Wednedsay, Gorsuch and Sotomayor issued a rate joint statement in which they said the reporting was inaccurate.
"Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false," the justices said in the statement. "While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends."
The CDC says having diabetes can make a person more likely to get severely ill from Covid-19, and Sotomayor has been wearing a mask at in-person proceedings since last fall.
Amid the surge in Omicron cases, according to NPR, "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."
The reporting provoked widespread rebuke of Gorsuch.
"That Justice Sotomayor is choosing to participate in #SCOTUS arguments remotely because Justice Gorsuch (and *only* Justice Gorsuch) refuses to wear a mask on the bench is such a perfect microcosm of how millions of Americans are experiencing the pandemic--from both perspectives," tweeted law professor Steve Vladeck.
"Personally," said former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance in response to the reporting, "I feel like we're entitled to expect our Supreme Court justices to be better role models. Or, at least, to have an ounce of decency. Putting on a mask would have cost Gorsuch nothing, but then he didn't care about risk to front line workers, either."
Journalist Sarah Burris tied Gorsuch's mask refusal to his anti-choice record.
"So Gorsuch was miffed he felt like he was being 'forced' to wear a mask... but he's about to say women should be forced to carry a dangerous pregnancy to term," she tweeted.
Currently, reproductive health experts and pro-choice advocates are furious with the right-wing majority of Justices on the court who have refused to halt a state law in Texas that bars abortions after just 6 weeks of pregnancy.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said last month it was "outrageous" for the court to "not to block Texas' unconstitutional abortion ban." The people of Texas, she said, "are harmed every day this law is allowed to stand."
The reporting about Gorsuch's refusal to mask, though now in doubt given the joint statement from he and Sotomayor, comes just days after the Supreme Court's right-wing majority struck down the Biden administration's vaccine-or-test mandate for large private employers.
Correction/Update: This article has been updated from its original to account for the new statement from Sotomayor and Gorsuch issued on Wednesday, January 19.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy