The GOP leadership of the U.S. House, led by Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), is standing firm in defending mask fines that have been challenged by Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), and Ralph Norman (R-S.C.). These officials have taken their case to the Supreme Court, raising questions about the legality of these fines.
The fines in question were introduced by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) as a measure to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. However, Greene, Massie, and Norman, all Republicans, have requested a Supreme Court review of the fines they were subjected to for failing to wear masks on the House floor.
Despite their disagreement with Pelosi’s mask policy, Johnson and the GOP leadership have decided to uphold the constitutionality of these fines. Their attorneys have presented arguments for the Supreme Court to endorse earlier judgments that supported the fines. They emphasize that the case is not about the wisdom of the rule or whether it was based on sound science, but rather about the legality of the fines.
Greene and her co-defendants argue that these fines amount to an unlawful deduction from their House salary. Greene, in particular, has accumulated over $100,000 in fines for her refusal to wear a mask for most of 2021 and into 2022.
However, the likelihood of the trio’s petition for a Supreme Court review succeeding is slim, as the Court only agrees to hear a small fraction of the petitions it receives each term.
While the mask fines have become a legal battle, they also have political implications. Pelosi, who implemented the fines, has announced her plans to run for re-election to Congress in 2024. Her decision was influenced by her commitment to local challenges and her ability to enhance the Democrats’ profile and financial support for the 2024 elections.
On the other hand, Greene, who has been a vocal critic of the mask fines, has been in the limelight for her controversial claims about the Democrats’ actions during the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. Her contentious remarks, published in her upcoming book, have been strongly refuted by her fellow representatives, who have labeled them as ‘patently false.’
The ongoing battle over mask fines highlights the deep divide within Congress on issues related to COVID-19 safety measures. While some lawmakers argue for the importance of public health and safety, others see these measures as infringements on personal freedom. As the legal and political battles continue, it remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of these fines and what impact it will have on the broader debate surrounding COVID-19 safety measures.
