Chief Justice John Roberts seems to be making conservatives quite unhappy with his rulings, and one of his most recent actions presumably has many conservatives frustrated and angry.
That’s because according to The Washington Free Beacon, Justice Roberts denied a challenge on President Joe Biden’s air travel mask mandates that was brought forth by plaintiffs who argue that they’re unable to wear masks due to medical reasons.
It should be noted that while Roberts decided to block the emergency block request, the case is still being litigated in the lower courts for now.
Also of note is the fact that Roberts, who handles emergency requests stemming from the Washington D.C. area, not only declined to comment on his ruling, but also refused to refer the case to fellow SCOTUS justices, with court observers claiming that such a move is a sign that he believes the case lacks merit.
One of the plaintiffs, Florida resident Michael Seklecki, argued that he and his child have medical disabilities that make wearing a mask unsafe, and as a result, have had to halt any plans of traveling by air, as all major airlines are required to abide by the masking mandate.
According to The Hill, Seklecki is joined in the suit against the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) by Lucas Wall, a man who claims he’s stranded at his mother’s Florida residence as he’s unable to wear the mask during air travel due to an anxiety disorder.
The Biden administration had enacted the air travel mask mandate in the early days following their takeover of the White House, and most recently President Biden ordered that the mandate be extended well into next year — March 18 to be exact.
While the request to block the air travel mask mandate failed, the Biden administration has taken a number of legal hits as of late, with courts around the country temporarily halting various vaccine mandates for different sectors of workers.
Given that we’re nearly two years into the COVID-19 pandemic, and given what we now know about the effectiveness of masks, it seems like the procedure for the aforementioned plaintiffs to receive proper medical exemptions would be quite a bit smoother than it appears to be.