"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."

 A statement from Sotomayor and Gorsuch, tweeted by the NYT reporter Adam Liptak.

Also tweeted by Liptak, a statement from Chief Justice Roberts: “I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench.”

Here's Liptak's article at the NYT, giving the background: 

The justices’ statements seemed to be primarily directed at a report by Nina Totenberg of NPR on Tuesday attributed to “court sources.” In it, Ms. Totenberg said that Justice 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 report said.

I blogged Totenberg's article (yesterday, here), but not the part about the masks, even though Gorsuch's mask is forefronted. The headline is "Gorsuch didn't mask despite Sotomayor's COVID worries, leading her to telework." There's no correction there, and Liptak says NPR said it stands behind Totenberg's reporting. Liptak doesn't — and can't — say Totenberg (or her sources) were wrong. Roberts, Sotomayor, and Gorsuch could all be lying or stretching the truth. 

And what counts as asking Gorsuch to wear a mask? Maybe Roberts/Sotomayor said something more general and respectful, such as expressing the opinion that it's a good idea to wear masks to protect others and that they'll be wearing a mask or just saying that they'll be wearing a mask because they believe it's best. That's not directly asking, but could be construed by the sources as a way of obliquely asking. 

Anyway, I love the statement "we are warm colleagues and friends." I hope they are, and at least they show that they know they should be, that the legal disputes are not personal. It's not just a matter of displaying civility. It's foundational to their legitimacy.

UPDATE: "NPR reporting on Supreme Court mask controversy merits clarification/An inaccurate verb choice made the reporting unclear" (NPR).

Totenberg and her editors should have chosen a word other than "asked." And she could have been clear about how she knew there was subtle pressure to wear masks (the nature or even exact number of her anonymous sources) and what she didn't know (exactly how Roberts was communicating)....

The way NPR's story was originally worded, news consumers must choose between believing the chief justice or believing Totenberg. A clarification improving on the verb choice that describes the inner workings of the court would solve that dilemma.