The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Chief Justice Roberts, and Justice Sotomayor and Gorsuch Release Statements About #Maskgate
I am grateful the Court is fighting back against leaks and disinformation.
In August 2020, I wrote a provocative op-ed, titled "A Supreme Court Divided Cannot Stand. John Roberts Must Step up or Step Off." At the time, the Supreme Court had more leaks than the Titanic, and I felt decisive action was needed to right the ship. What was the first step? Roberts must speak out.
First, the chief justice must immediately issue a public statement, on his own behalf, about the leaks. He should declare these leaks unacceptable, and announce that he is investigating the breaches of confidentiality. He cannot simply deny reality. The Court needs an emergency tourniquet to stop the bleeding.
I'm pleased to report that Chief Justice Roberts has followed my advice--or something like that.
In response to #Maskgate, we have received an unprecedented response from the Court.
First, Justices Sotomayor and Gorsuch released a joint statement:
Just in: Statement by Justice Sotomayor and Justice Gorsuch: 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.
Just in: Statement by Justice Sotomayor and Justice Gorsuch:
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.— Robert Barnes (@robert_a_barnes) January 19, 2022
But this statement did not address the controversy. The leaked reports said Sotomayor asked Roberts to talk to Gorsuch, or something like that. The #Maskgate conspiracy grows!
Second, Chief Justice Roberts issued a statement!
"I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench."
MORE JUST IN on Maskgate, this time from the Chief Justice: "I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench."
— Robert Barnes (@robert_a_barnes) January 19, 2022
Good for Roberts, Sotomayor, and Gorsuch. Leading members of the Supreme Court press corps relied on inaccurate sourcing, and they got burned. I am grateful the Court is fighting back against leaks and disinformation. The Chief does not need to resign, for now at least.
But--there is always a but--putting out a statement now creates a precedent. What happens if there there are future leaks, and the Court does not reply? Do we then presume the leaks were accurate, or that the Justices could not agree on a response?
Now, can we please let #Maskgate die? This controversy is so, so stupid.
Update: Alas, we are not done yet. NPR is standing behind Totenberg's report:
NPR stands by my reportinghttps://t.co/eEtiNgMQet
— Nina Totenberg (@NinaTotenberg) January 19, 2022
Three Supreme Court justices issued statements Wednesday addressing an NPR story about relations among the justices. On Tuesday, NPR reported that that Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a longtime diabetic, had indicated to Chief Justice John Roberts that because of the Omicron surge, she did not feel safe being in a room with people who are unmasked, and that the chief justice, "in some form asked the other justices to mask up."
On Wednesday, Sotomayor and Gorsuch issued a statement saying that she did not ask him to wear a mask. NPR's report did not say that she did. Then, the chief justice issued a statement saying he "did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other justice to wear a mask on the bench." The NPR report said the chief justice's ask to the justices had come "in some form."
So Roberts did not "request Justice Gorsuch or any other justice to wear a mask on the bench." But Roberts "in some form asked the other justices to mask up." Where? In conference, when they weren't on the bench? Or did Roberts make his request without actually asking? Did he point at his mouth and make a pantomime motion? I don't even know what we are arguing about anymore.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Maybe its time for Nina Totenberg to resign. NPR should also appoint an independent investigator.
Didn't you just post this a few hours ago, and update that post three times?
Has the "sticky comment submit button" started to affect OPs as well?
James Hacker : "No, but it's never been officially denied. First rule in politics: never believe anything until it's officially denied."
Not just denied, but denied officially.
This opens up another can of worms: what was the motive for the false leaks? Or inadequate reporting?
Why would NPR falsely say something that reflects badly on conservatives or republicans? It beggars the imagination!
"I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench."
Asking to wear them in chambers, or to just wear them.... no comment.
Come on. He's apparently a lawyer, I hear. If he wanted to be interpreted differently, he knows how English works.
Is it possible for Blackman to write anything without injecting himself into it?
"I'm pleased to report that Chief Justice Roberts has followed my advice--or something like that."
No. The answer is no.
I was about to post the same thing. I am sure Germans have a word for verbal/written masturbation. Do we have something similar in English.
Don't worry Josh. You do you.
schriftsselbstgeschlechtsverkehr
Perhaps you need to believe that some people have a sense of humor. Even ones you don't like.
lol at all the stupid Maskholes on this site demanding Gorsuch harm his medical health over another lefty fake news hoax.
"But--there is always a but--putting out a statement now creates a precedent. What happens if there are future leaks..."
Presumably nobody will believe them, since the journalists covering the court have destroyed their credibility with this incident, right?
It's almost like Totenberg was willing to write anything that makes the conservative wing of the court look bad. Imagine that! Assuming that she had a real source for this, presumably it was from someone in the court who had the same agenda.
There is always the remote possibility it was a sting to find out who has been leaking information about the court to journalists. In any event, Sotomayor and Gorsuch do have a good relationship as demonstrated by their joint appearances on behalf of civic education. For all anyone knows, Sotomayor may want the time away from the bench and Gorsuch gave her an excuse.
"Good for Roberts, Sotomayor, and Gorsuch. Leading members of the Supreme Court press corps relied on inaccurate sourcing, and they got burned."
I think you're not considering another possibility- that the justices are lying and just trying to cover it up. I'm not saying it's the case but covering up workplace embarrassments isn't exactly an unheard of thing.
It's possible. Totenberg can certainly make her case and present evidence that her version is more reliable than that of the justices, who have firsthand knowledge of the matter.
Why would Sotomayor want to or be willing to participate in a cover-up? Hell, many suggested she leaked the story to Totenberg.
Sotomayor a sitting SCOTUS justice, and will remain so for life. She's also not particularly shy or submissive.
The far more plausible scenario is that Sotomayor decided to work remotely due to the easy transmissibility of Omicron and her unique health concerns, and only then did Gorsuch decide to not wear a mask during arguments. There was no need to ask him to mask up under these circumstances. Also, Totenberg is a partisan hack who would gladly rely on an unreliable source if it lead to a potentially embarrassing story concerning a court conservative.
The Totenberg story, including the denial by many members of the press even after the statements by Gorsuch and Sotomayor and Roberts, is just a clear demonstration of confirmation bias.
"She's also not particularly shy or submissive." Do you have any evidence backing up that claim? Just joking; I think what you said should have been followed by, "putting it mildly."
Which she rarely does.
I actually litigated before when she was just a district court judge in SDNY. My knowledge is first-hand!
Maybe we can get Bill Burkett, Mary Mapes, and Dan Rather out retirement, and Burkett could type up some forged memos of Roberts complaining "damn it I ordered Gorsuch to wear a mask, he refused, coughed on Sotomayer, and she ran screaming to lock herself in her office, so I ratted on Gorsuch to NPR" and then Dan Rather can make a solemn report on the affair in a revived 60 Minutes Special.
but covering up workplace embarrassments isn't exactly an unheard of thing.
We've been through 5 years, 100's reporters lying about Russia, Russia, Russia,
But you find a 3 Supreme Court Justices conspiracy.
NPR puts out fake news - shocker!
National
Pubic
Radio
I think Totenberg just wanted to make it seem she had the inside "scoop" and made the entire thing up as a hit job on Gorsuch.
This sounds right to me.
Nina, prove me wrong.
The Drive By Media strikes again! Surprise, surprise!
Remember all those "exclusive" articles during the Russia investigation where supposedly they had the smoking gun on Trump?
Dan Rather on Bush?
Or more recently how Kyle Rittenhouse crossed state lines with a machine gun to kill black protesters?
Yeah that is all the media that is supposed to keep us informed. Don't believe a thing they tell you.
It must be true - otherwise twitter and facebook would have blocked the report
Have they had time to react?
So NPR is effectively reporting that Sotomayor, Gorsuch, and Roberts are all lying.
It's more likely that NPR is full of it.
Well, lots of people here who haven't read Alder's original post and are attacking NPR based on a misunderstanding Adler picked up on.
Amazingly many of them commented there at the time.
Ken Meyer, "Justice Sotomayor Rules in Favor of Shannon Bream Over NPR’s ‘Fake’ Report on Neil Gorsuch Mask Dispute", Mediate, 19 Jan 2022
A statement from Justices Sotomayor and Gorsuch:
"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."
"New York Times Supreme Court correspondent Adam Liptak obtained a joint statement from Sotomayor and Gorsuch that seems to favor Bream’s side of the story over Totenburg’s."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/justice-sotomayor-rules-in-favor-of-shannon-bream-over-npr-s-fake-report-on-neil-gorsuch-mask-dispute/ar-AASWgiU
Lol. You're referring to hair-splitting over whether Sotomayor asked Gorsuch directly or indirectly through Roberts, or formally or informally?
Not even Gorsuch and Sotomayor bought that distinction, and Roberts has denied asking the justices to wear masks.
I'm referring to everyone saying Nina Totenberg lied. Y'all accepted that and now suddenly turned on it because it lets you attack NPR.
Just obvious jettisoning what was actually reported to get your ten minutes of hate in.
" Y'all accepted that and now suddenly turned on it because it lets you attack NPR."
Huh? Nina Totenburg either lied or relied on bad sources. And that lets me attack NPR, quite reasonably, since they're standing by her reporting.
You don’t know what we’re arguing about anymore? Well, here’s a hint - it had little to do with the law and a lot to do with raw political power. It has to do with dividing people by race, ethnicity, and gender.
Now, we see this little story and then the justices release their statements indicating the story is false.
But how many stories like this to do we read and no one breaks through to challenge the narrative? If the justices hadn’t issued statements, we’d have all believed Gorsuch was not wearing a mask to spite Sotomeyer. So what do we believe today that simply isn’t true?