(Washington) Three judges of the Supreme Court of the United States on Wednesday sought to defuse controversy over wearing a mask inside a reputable organization.
Released at 3:24 p.m.
Since last week, despite the re-emergence of Covid 19 infections in Washington under the influence of the Omigran variant, only Conservative Neil Korsch of the court’s nine magistrates has not covered his face during the trial.
On the contrary, his progressive colleague Sonia Sotomayor, who suffers from diabetes and is highly susceptible to the virus, did not leave the mask, and since the start of the school year in January, has been participating in discussions via audio link from his office. .
On Tuesday, the public radio NPR, citing unnamed sources, confirmed that High Court Chief Justice John Roberts, in consideration of his colleague, had asked all judges to wear masks and that Neil Korsch had refused.
NPR’s information denied
The latter, who was appointed to the post by Donald Trump, was later crushed on Twitter.
On Wednesday, three judges denied the allegations: They are wrong, ”the two involved wrote first.
“Although we sometimes disagree on legal issues, we are loving colleagues and friends,” they added.
Shortly afterwards, Judge Roberts dismissed the case:
I never asked Judge Korsch or any other magistrate to wear a mask during the trial
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts
Judge Roberts said he would not comment further.
Nine wise men from the Temple of American Law have received three doses of the vaccine and are constantly being tested. After several months of teleworking, they have been sitting in front of at least a small audience since October. In the fall, some of them had masks, but all but Neil Korsch returned to the habit of wearing them.
Wearing a mask is a very strong political symbol in the United States, where in some places the obligation to cover one’s face is considered a violation of personal liberty by a large part of the right.
Supreme Court justices want to reiterate their emphasis on the cohesiveness of their work, beyond political battles. However, it is difficult for them to hide the deep differences between the solid Conservative majority (six judges) and the left-wing minority (three).