By John Rolfe / Red Hook, NY Remember the good old days before the pandemic, when going to work while sick was a virtue, a sign of a valiant combat mentality where neither pain nor sneeze nor gloom of Nyquil would stay you from the swift completion of your appointed rounds? Your actual job performance in that condition was still in question, of course. I well recall my years in an office cube farm that awaited me at the end of a three-hour (each way) commute to Manhattan. I routinely went in with head colds and sometimes worse, usually spending the days miserably clutching moist tissues, a box of Sudafed, and a bottle of nasal spray, my red eyes on the clock more than on the work at hand. Gastric upsets also ate, so to speak, into my time at my desk and my enthusiasm for thinking. And let us not forget the traditional annoyance we felt at those who hacked and coughed and vented all kinds of bugs on the train or bus, at nearby desks, in the elevator, or by the coffee machine. Who among us welcomed having our lives sidetracked for a few days or a week by these pestilent people? These days, going to work while under the weather likely means carrying Covid-19 to the public. It’s a virus that seems to hit everyone a little differently and with varying severity. When I caught it at my workplace in August 2000, I wound up afflicted with eight days of 102.5° fever, lethargy and loss of appetite. A co-worker with whom I’d been in close proximity ended up hospitalized. She said it was worse than the Legionnaires’ Disease that had nearly killed her several years earlier. I now toil as a bus driver for a school district in New York’s Hudson Valley. We pilots of big yellow madhouses are ordinarily in short supply, but the pandemic is wreaking havoc on our ability to ferry the nation’s children to school each day. Our usual policy is to stay home when we’re sick. It’s only common sense and courtesy that we shouldn’t be spreading germs to the kids on our buses and our co-workers. Not coming in while even suspecting Covid is mandatory…sort of. There is now tremendous pressure — economic, political and social — to keep as many people working and life as close to normal as possible. Parents want their kids in classrooms. Employers want their workers in offices, stores, restaurants, transportation hubs and medical facilities. Politicians want us to make them look good by not disrupting their proclaimed paradise. But there is great confusion, perhaps even more than at the outset of the pandemic, about what is actually safe. Which masks work best? How effective are vaccines? How long should you quarantine if exposed to Covid or wait to return to work if you’ve had it? It all depends on who says what on any given day and whom you choose to believe: the CDC, Dr. Anthony Fauci, assorted government officials, Joe the Baseball-Cap-Wearing-Pundit-Podcasting-From-His-Basement, and too many more. The CDC’s ever-changing guidance regarding isolation/quarantine and precautions for the exposed and stricken seems to be making most of us crazy, not to mention states and counties banning or refusing to enforce preventative mandates as courts issue conflicting rulings. Meanwhile, the question of whether to go to work when feeling off remains fraught with potentially serious consequences. Last December, I developed sniffles. I’d been fully vaxxed and knew what Covid felt like. (Kinda like the flu, but different.) I honestly don’t feel it’s safe to drive a 40-foot bus with 40 kids on board if I’m not fully sharp. I need to be energetic and focused, not in a fog. We are not allowed to take over-the-counter medication as it can make us drowsy and its presence in our bloodstream can get us taken off the road if detected by one of our random drug tests. The sniffles I had felt like a common cold — more annoying than fully distracting. I was well aware that I might have Covid, but we’ve been so short-staffed that we’re practically kidnapping people off the street to cover our routes. I should have gotten tested, but my insurance had been dropped by the urgent-care facility I had used (I don’t have a primary care physician) and I didn’t know where else to go. So I affixed my mask to my leaky face, did my best to not snuffle when near anyone, and hauled my squealing urchins without incident. You probably know or have heard of someone who had what seemed like a mild cold that turned out to be a confirmed case of Covid. A co-worker of mine recently came down with it and returned to work after five days instead of the formerly recommended 10 once her symptoms improved. But she still felt tired and not quite right. Nevertheless, we needed her and any other warm carcasses who can function in a reasonably productive fashion. Vaxxed or tested, urging everyone to work in dicey health, is ultimately self-defeating, especially in places where many workers refuse to be vaccinated or even wear masks. They are the ones who are being hit the hardest by even the supposedly milder Omicron variant. Every workplace will reach a breaking point if enough people get sick. It's a bitter shame that Americans couldn’t pull together and get a handle on this virus at the outset two years ago. It still would have been a rough road but not as big a hash as we’ve made of it. Now we’re just going to have to ride it out as best we can while (hopefully) following our common sense and conscience. No matter what we want, the virus will continue to call the shots, so to speak. John Rolfe is a former senior editor for Sports Illustrated for Kids, a longtime columnist for the Poughkeepsie Journal/USA Today Network, and author of The Goose in the Bathroom: Stirring Tales of Family Life. His school bus drivin’ blog “Hellions, Mayhem and Brake Failure” is parked on his website Celestialchuckle.com (https://celestialchuckle.com) with the meter running.

By Andy Borowitz January 26, 2022 WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—As reports of a United States Supreme Court Justice retiring spread on Wednesday, millions of Americans were bummed that it wasn’t Clarence Thomas. In interviews across the country, Americans revealed that their momentary elation was followed by deep disappointment when they learned that a jurist other than Thomas was departing the bench. “When I heard that someone on the Court had retired, my first thought was, Please, please, please let it be Thomas,” said Carol Foyler, who lives in Milwaukee. “I guess it was too good to be true.” “I’m grateful that Breyer is leaving the Court at a time when President Biden will be able to nominate his replacement,” Stacy Klugian, who resides in Nashville, said. “Still, it totally blows that it wasn’t Thomas.” Harland Dorrinson, who lives in San Mateo, had a more positive view of the day’s events. “Stephen Breyer has earned a wonderful retirement,” he said. “And I hope he sends back a lot of postcards to the Court showing him on amazing vacations, and that makes that bastard Thomas decide to retire, too.” Andy Borowitz is a Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes The Borowitz Report, a satirical column on the news.

FRED PLOTKIN is one of America’s foremost experts on opera and has distinguished himself in many fields as a writer, speaker, consultant and as a compelling teacher. He is an expert on everything Italian, the person other so-called Italy experts turn to for definitive information.  Fred discovered the concept of "The Renaissance Man" as a small child and has devoted himself to pursuing that ideal as the central role of his life. In a “Public Lives” profile in The New York Times on August 30, 2002, Plotkin was described as "one of those New York word-of-mouth legends, known by the cognoscenti for his renaissance mastery of two seemingly separate disciplines: music and the food of Italy." In the same publication, on May 11, 2006, it was written that "Fred is a New Yorker, but has the soul of an Italian."

By Andy Borowitz January 20, 2022 WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—After the Supreme Court authorized the release of Donald J. Trump’s documents related to the Capitol insurrection, Hillary Clinton recommended that congressional Republicans examine the former President’s e-mails. “I know that Republicans have thousands of documents to go through,” she said. “But, if I were them, I’d take a close look at Trump’s e-mails.” Clinton said that she had “no idea” what is in Trump’s e-mails, but added, “Given how hard he tried to keep them from being released, those must be some e-mails.” The former Secretary of State acknowledged that her advice to Republicans was “probably not necessary.” “My memory of congressional Republicans is that they are very diligent investigators who leave no stone unturned,” she said. “I’m sure they’ve been spending every waking hour trying to get their hands on Donald Trump’s e-mails. They must be so excited to finally have them.” Andy Borowitz is a Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes The Borowitz Report, a satirical column on the news.

By Rabbi Yael Buechler | January 12, 2022 | Originally published in Mothermag.com “That’s not my mask!” my three-year-old exclaimed as I tried to fit him with the new surgical accessory he will be wearing to school this week. Change is hard for everyone, let alone a preschooler accustomed to wearing cloth masks for as long as he can remember. “It’s tie-dye,” I offered, trying to rationalize the change though I knew that he, like me, greatly prefers the soft feel of jersey fabric. I never imagined that parenting would involve negotiating with a preschooler on medical-related matters. Leading up to winter break, I pleaded with my son to wear a mask at recess, even though his teachers (and the C.D.C.) said it was kosher to remove them outdoors. I still don’t know if he complied. Like other families, we spent the first year of the pandemic hunkered down at home. The following year, my preschooler and his four-year-old brother returned to school—while we anxiously awaited an email announcing that one or the other’s class was in quarantine. This wave of Omicron in year three is pushing me—and other parents of young children—to a new level of anxiety. The usual distractions, like TV bingewatching, don’t help me anymore. Even the second season of Emily in Paris, with its bright and outlandish outfits, couldn’t filter out Omicron dread. I want to give my younger son every protection in the world, and I want the vaccine to be safe and effective when kids under 5 are finally able to receive it. But for now, my hands are tied: He’s not yet eligible for the vaccine like his older brother. In the meantime, it feels like I’m making momentous health decisions for him every day. Should I allow him to use the elevator in our apartment building, or is that increasing his risk? Do I continue sending him to a school where he can learn and socialize with his peers—even though it surely increases his chances of getting Covid-19, given the speed at which this variant is spreading? We live in the Bronx which has the highest positivity rate of all of the New York City boroughs, at a whopping 27%. Sometimes I wonder if we should just throw up our hands and give in to the likelihood that this virus will enter our home sooner or later. Experts say this variant is milder—which is great, except they’re mostly talking about individuals who are double vaccinated and boosted. In fact, just last week C.D.C. director Rochelle Walensky told reporters that we are “sadly…seeing the rates of hospitalizations increasing for children 0-4, who are not currently eligible for Covid-19 vaccinations.” Bottom line: I would greatly prefer that my three-year-old not get this virus. I work as a rabbi in an elementary school. I’m not as concerned about the transmission rates there since most students and faculty that should be home are at home—that list is very long right now. And overall, the parents and administration—I include myself in both categories—have done as much as possible to establish safe pandemic protocols and uphold them. Yet with younger, nursery-age students, social distancing isn’t really possible, and enforcing consistent mask-wearing is tough. Kids still need to eat snacks and lunch, and have rest time (which we could all use at this point!)—which are unmasked activities. Upon returning to school after New Year’s, my son brought home five projects from nursery school: a toilet-paper penguin with cotton balls surrounding it, paper hands with statements of gratitude, two abstract pieces, and a birdfeeder. Some of these projects were left over from 2021, when his school thankfully closed early to reduce potential transmissions. As I walked in the door, he was eager to explain each project to me, insisting that we immediately find a place to hang the birdfeeder (alas, there is no backyard or balcony here). My son didn’t see the tears in my eyes as I removed my winter coat and mask and breathed in a whiff of normalcy. For a moment there, I envied that penguin, so cozy and safe in his cotton display. Writer and mother of two Rabbi Yael Buechler is the founder of MidrashManicures.com, which creates fashion items for Jewish holidays. She’s excited for the debut of Matza Pajamas, inspired by her three-year-old, which will help her get through another pandemic Passover.

One film journalist’s stream-of-consciousness cinematic journey through the pandemic, Part 68 By Laurence Lerman / New York City I recently streamed Ken Russell’s 1974 Mahler on The Criterion Channel, filling in a conspicuously missing title in my decades-long consumption of the British director’s filmography. As entertaining and informative as it is ornate and excessive, Russell’s chronicle of the life of the esteemed composer Gustav Mahler is well-suited to the filmmaker and his flamboyant style. Russell made his bones crafting arts and music documentaries for the BBC before moving into theatrical features in the late 1960s. And with the arrival of three films in 1971—the musical The Boyfriend, the Tchaikovsky bio-pic The Music Lovers and Savage Messiah, a chronicle about French sculptor Henri Gaudier-Brzeska—Russell began to pump up the stylistic overindulgence that became his trademark. This was also very true of Mahler, which was filled with flashbacks, fantasy sequences and pastoral inserts, while also providing an enjoyable biographical dip into the music man’s life. Born in 1860 in Bohemia (then part of the Austrian Empire) into a German-speaking Ashkenazic Jewish family of modest means, Mahler’s talent in music as a boy was strongly encouraged by his parents. After attending the Vienna Conservatory and Vienna University as a teenager, he began his career as a conductor, and during his own lifetime, grew to be regarded as one of the leading orchestral and operatic conductors of the day. Mahler’s body of work is relatively limited—composing was essentially a part-time activity for him that always played second to his earning a living wage as a conductor. Nonetheless, the Austro-Bohemian’s music, which was never highly regarded during his own lifetime (he died in 1911), gained widespread popularity with a new generation of listeners in the second half of the 20th century. It was generally designed for large orchestras and symphonic choruses, giving it a sweeping appeal that’s often been described as “cinematic” by the critics and classic audiences. That has made Mahler one of the most frequently performed and recorded composers of the past 50 years. Over the years, I’ve grown into a casual fan. So what was even more intriguing than Russell’s film (which was nominated for the Palme d’Or at Cannes in ’74) was the trigger effect that Mahler’s music had on me. There are nearly two dozen Mahler musical cues in the film (not surprisingly), sumptuously performed by The Netherlands’ Royal Concertgebouw, and I was most gratified to find myself recognizing a number of passages throughout. Not because I’m a knowledgeable classical enthusiast (I’m not) or because I have attended numerous Mahler programs at the Philharmonic (I haven’t), but rather I identified them from a number of films I’ve seen—and heard!—over the years. Yeah, he’s cinematic, alright! The first time I heard Mahler in the movies was more than 40 years ago in the tense 1974 drama The Gambler, one of my father’s favorites and soon to be mine after we watched its network TV premiere back in the late 1970s. I’ve seen The Gambler many times since and have for years admired the effectiveness of Mahler’s music on the soundtrack. It’s one of what are undoubtedly dozens if not hundreds of films and television shows that contain orchestral renditions of the composer’s glorious work. Here are a half-dozen of my favorites: Death in Venice (1971) Symphony No. 3 and Symphony No. 5 I first saw Luchino Visconti’s disturbing take on Thomas Mann’s 1912 novella in a downtown revival house in 1988, the year I moved to Manhattan. The Italian master weaves in sections from both Mahler symphonies throughout the entire film. They’re at their most effective twice; First, at the beginning, when Dirk Bogarde’s dying composer protagonist’s steamship first arrives in the city, which is slowly coming under the grip of a cholera epidemic. And then at the climax, when he succumbs to his own weakened heart—and repressed passions—in a lounge chair on a lonely hotel beach, black hair dye streaking down his cheeks. The Gambler (1974) Symphony No. 1 in D major Hollywood composer Jerry Fielding based almost his entire score for Karel Reisz’s film on the grand Symphony No. 1, which moves between brooding, dark passages to beautiful, soaring melodies. It elegantly underscores the highs and lows of nice Jewish boy Axel Freed (James Caan), an NYC college professor whose compulsive gambling and Dostoevsky-esque yearning for risk-taking puts him into some serious hot water with a gangland shylock. It also prompts a juiced-up Axel to hop on a plane to a Caesar’s Palace blackjack table in Vegas, where he hits on an 18 and manages to pull a 3. Children of Men (2006) Kindertodtenlieder Alfonso Cuarón’s sci-fi action thriller is set in 2027, when humankind is infertile and society has been left on the brink of collapse. In other words, a perfect environment in which to get philosophical about love and violence, the latter growing quite startling in the second half. The sound of automatic weapons and explosion reverberating through a large refugee camp outside of London is marvelously offset by Mahler’s majestically somber Kindertodtenlieder. German for “Songs of the Death of Children,” this 1904 song cycle for voice and orchestra was inspired by the original Kindertodtenlieder, a group of 428 poems written by the 19th century German poet Friedrich Rückert following the illness and death of two of his children from scarlet fever. Shutter Island (2010) Piano Quartet in A minor Or, to be exact, a “Quartet Movement for Piano, Violin, Viola and Cello in A minor.” Mahler’s sole surviving piece of instrumental chamber music, which he composed at the Vienna Conservatory when he was approximately 15 years old, was considered lost for years, only to be rediscovered in the early 1960s by Mahler’s widow. It was also found by Martin Scorsese, who put it to stunning use in Gothic-flavored psychological thriller about a troubled U.S. marshal (Leonardo DiCaprio) investigating an offshore psychiatric facility. The piece is cued in a scene where the marshal flashes back to his days as a soldier in WWII where he was part of a violence-filled liberation of a Nazi death camp. It’s a particularly symbolic choice of music as Mahler’s music was banned by the Nazi regime because he was Jewish. The Tree of Life (2011) Symphony No. 1 The great Terrence Malick has primarily featured classical music on the soundtracks of all ten of his feature films. The Tree of Life jumps to No. 1 with a bullet with selections and snippets from more than 30 pieces, including works by Brahms, Bach, Mussorgski, Holst and Mozart. The opening passages of Mahler’s first symphony forebodingly accent a pair of seminal scenes in the film, both involving death and how it affects the featured characters, a family in mid-1950s Texas. Mahler’s music adds both a spiritual wonderment and a feeling of acceptance to the loftily filmed proceedings. Birdman (2015) Rückert-Lieder At the midway point of this Oscar winner directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu, Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton), a fading film actor attempting to resuscitate his career as a Broadway director, is approached by an emotional performer in his play, and things begin to unravel in his head. As rising tensions and fears slowly get the best of Riggan, the evocative Rückert-Lieder, a collection of five Lieder (German for “song”) gently underscore the build to a possible implosion. Rückert was clearly a go-to inspiration for Mahler. And though I’m unfamiliar with the poet’s oeuvre, I can say that the music it inspired here is gorgeous. It’s all gorgeous—and nearly an inspiration for me to search out those dozens of other films and TV shows featuring music by the man. Laurence Lerman is a film journalist, former editor of Video Business--Variety's DVD trade publication--and husband to The Insider's own Gwen Cooper. Over the course of his career he has conducted one-on-one interviews with just about every major director working today, including Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, Clint Eastwood, Kathryn Bigelow, Ridley Scott, Walter Hill, Spike Lee, and Werner Herzog, among numerous others. Once James Cameron specifically requested an interview with Laurence by name, which his wife still likes to brag about. Most recently, he is the co-founder and editor-in-chief of the online review site DiscDish.com.

By Alan Resnick / Detroit In January, I started a part-time job shortly after my 71st birthday. I’d had a wonderful position since 2017 conducting vocational assessments for a human services organization, but my hours dropped dramatically after Covid emerged. In fact, my W2 form arrived last week and, after breaking down my gross income by my hourly wage, I discovered that I worked on average a little less than one hour per week last year. That barely qualifies as mini-time, let alone part-time. But my job hunt was not financially motivated or driven by a burning desire for increased human contact. Rather, like millions of other Americans, my waistline has expanded since the pandemic reared its virulent head. I get on the treadmill or elliptical machine for at least 45 minutes five times a week, but I’m done by 9:00 a.m. and too much of the rest of my days has been spent consuming YouTube TV, Netflix, and junk food. I wanted something that would get me out of the house and away from the TV and refrigerator, but like the millions of Americans who have quit their jobs, potentially exposing myself and others to Covid in a workplace was a major concern. I wanted to work only in place that demanded employees and customers wear masks. I’m vaccinated, boosted and cautious in public, so I felt any risk I may be taking is a calculated one weighed against my physical health as my weight goes up and my mental health goes down out of boredom. I did not give my comparatively advanced age any thought when I started looking for part-time work. The hardest part was finding something that remotely appealed to me. I didn’t want to be a driver or delivery person, so that ruled out many of the listed jobs for Uber, Lyft, Grubhub, Amazon or UPS. I didn’t want to be lifting and carrying things all day, so that nixed warehouse work. And since I tend to run on the cool, curmudgeonly side of the warmth scale, I turned my nose up at the many listings for in-store sales associate or similar positions. But after searching the internet for about 20 minutes, I came across a gig as a proctor for an organization that conducts pre-employment tests for private and public organizations, licensure testing on behalf of state and the federal agencies, and exams for certification with professional organizations and associations. The position was for two days a week and located just 15 minutes from my home. Perfect. Any fear of ageism would have been silly. I updated my résumé, emailed it, and was offered the job after two 20-minute phone interviews. My training consisted of three consecutive days of training via Zoom, followed by on-site sessions at the testing center. I confess that I struggled to stay focused for more than an hour on Zoom, so those full-day sessions were simply brutal. Blessedly, we trainees (there were five of us) weren’t required to keep our cameras on the entire time. This allowed me to at least yawn, check emails, play online Scrabble, and roll my eyes while listening. I finished my third day bloodshot and with an even deeper appreciation of, and sympathy for, students forced into remote learning by school shutdowns. Two days later, I reported for my first official day in the office. The test facility was nothing like the sleek, bright, warm, spacious center I’d seen on Zoom. This one made a typical Department of Motor Vehicles facility look like the lobby at Mar-a-Lago. The reception area where my desk is located had gouges in the walls and stained areas, paper shards on the floor by the shredding machine, and boxes of office supplies competing for floor space with the hard plastic chairs for candidates to sit on while they waited to be registered. It was a thoroughly bleak and depressing environment for everyone. Fortunately, the field trainer brought in to help me get up to speed was of a similar mindset. During the two weeks she was in town, she did a spectacular job of reorganizing the reception area to make it more inviting for candidates and functional for the proctors. It will never be mistaken for the luxe locale in the training videos, but it no longer looks like a den in a frat house on double secret probation. There are typically three test sessions a day. My responsibilities require a combination of airport security, FBI surveillance, and health mandate enforcement. We monitor everyone during our walk-throughs of the testing area and with cameras, looking for mask compliance and signs of cheating. Suspicious behavior, if repeated after a first warning, can result in a test being cancelled. I greet test takers, provide a mask if needed, check their ID (sometimes two kinds are needed) and ask them to read and sign two forms: a Covid Health Screening questionnaire and an outline of mandatory procedures. All candidates are photographed (sans masks and glasses if worn) and must remove their coats and watches, empty their pockets, and completely shut off all electronic devices (which I confirm). Their possessions are placed in a large, zippered fabric bag, which is locked but remains with the test taker, who is given paper, a pencil, and other materials relevant to their test. All materials must be accounted for, even scratch paper so that questions and answers can’t be given to friends who will take the same exam. One fellow returned a sheet with a small strip missing. He was told that unless he could find it, his test might be invalidated, so he stuck his hand in the wastebasket next to my desk, rummaged around and pulled out the piece of paper in question. It contained his used chewing gum. My biggest challenge (and frustration) has been getting all my usernames and passwords set up for their testing platforms and company websites. I now have eight different ones and still haven’t memorized them, but I sure can rattle off the phone number for Technical Support. I’ve already been locked out of three sites because I exceeded the number of incorrect login attempts. Even with jobs plentiful these days, we’ve typically had between four and 10 test takers per session. Most are seeking licenses in health and beauty, real estate, insurance sales, and residential building.. The best thing about the gig is when people come out of the testing room after learning they’ve passed. There are smiles of relief, fist pumps, and the occasional happy dance. I’ve always been a sucker for watching hard work and sacrifice be rewarded. Of course, the flip side is that not everyone passes. Some people take exams multiple times. Some ask for tips on how to study differently. More often they simply want to commiserate. I’m happy to oblige as long as no one else is in the reception area. I’m still getting the rhythm and flow of everything down, and haven’t decided if I like this job or it likes me. It’s only been a couple of weeks, so I haven’t seen a change reflected in my bathroom scale, but at least my weight hasn’t gone up. And there’s still a bag of unopened tortilla chips in the pantry, so that’s something. Alan Resnick is an industrial psychologist with over 40 years of professional experience. He and his wife are sheltering at home in Farmington Hills, Michigan. He is passing the time by cooking, exercising, catching up on friends’ recommendations of must-see TV and writing.

Sasha “We all currently have Covid. So that’s pretty scary.” Sasha and her husband live in Brooklyn. Sasha, who worked as an attorney, is now a stay-at-home parent. Her husband works in finance. They have a two-year-old daughter. The Insider: What has your life been like during the pandemic? Has your husband been working remotely? ‪Sasha: Yes, he has worked remotely on and off during the pandemic. The pandemic has been challenging for most people, I think. The Insider: Have both you and your husband been vaccinated? ‪Sasha: Vaccinated and boosted. The Insider: That’s not perfect protection, though, is it? ‪Sasha: Well, it seems to protect the vaccinated person pretty well. Unfortunately, our toddler is too young to be vaccinated. We all currently have Covid. So that’s pretty scary. The Insider: I’m so sorry to hear that! When were you all diagnosed? ‪Sasha: We tested positive over the weekend. The Insider: How in the world are you handling this? ‪Sasha: With infants’ Tylenol and Disney+. The Insider: Do you have to distance from your daughter, or doesn’t it matter at this point? ‪Sasha: We’re all sick, so no. And you can’t really distance from a toddler. The Insider: Can anyone from outside come in? ‪Sasha: No. The Insider: Your families must be frantic with worry. ‪Sasha: They’re handling it well. The Insider: Did one person get sick first? ‪Sasha: My husband got sick first. The Insider: And did he know what it was right away? Was he aware of having been exposed to it? ‪Sasha: He did not know what it was right away and he was not aware of having been exposed. We were somewhat surprised because we have been pretty cautious over the last couple of weeks. The Insider: Had you gone away over the holidays or anything? ‪Sasha: Nope. The Insider: Are you all showing the same symptoms, or is it presenting differently in each one of you? ‪Sasha: My husband and I have mild coldlike symptoms. Our daughter has a fever. The Insider: Are you getting medical advice now? ‪Sasha: Informally, by text. The Insider: If an anti-vaxxer said, doesn’t this prove vaccines don’t work, what would you say? ‪Sasha: I would say that I’m glad I was vaccinated because my Covid symptoms are mild, which enables me to take better care of my child. Wright “We treated her time in isolation as a mini-vacation with plenty of movie nights on the couch and ice cream each evening.” Wright lives in Honolulu and works at a university. His wife is a psychologist. They have two daughters, 11 and nearly 7. One of their daughters tested positive for Covid in December. The Insider: What kinds of pandemic precautions has your family been taking? Wright: We are all vaccinated and so grateful for it. My wife and I got boosters as soon as we were eligible, and we vaccinated our children the minute they were allowed. Throughout the pandemic, I feel like we have taken the safest approach possible to keep our family and community safe and balance our lives to maintain some social connections. We followed the science on the precautions we took early on and continue to keep up with best practices for the variant du jour. Once home tests were available, we started using them regularly for peace of mind. We were also able to accommodate our kids being in remote classes. I started working remotely in March 2020 and continue to telework occasionally. My wife is in healthcare and never really stopped going to her office, though most of her practice has moved online through telehealth. We are glad we have taken this approach and realize our privilege that we can have the systems in place. The Insider: Even with all of those precautions, a family member came down with Covid. Wright: Yes, our oldest daughter tested positive two days before Christmas. We have a pretty good accounting of our day-to-day interactions, and we could never figure out where she picked it up. Thankfully, she had a generally mild case. By some miracle, the rest of our family did not get it from her during her infectious window. I think my wife and I were able to take things in stride because we knew how effective the vaccines were both for our children and us. We also tried to make intelligent decisions when our daughter was positive, like masking up as a family when we were in a room together and keeping our house wide open. Fortunately, because we live in Hawaii, we could keep all of our doors and windows wide open, so it was as close to being outside as one could get. The Insider: What were her symptoms while she was sick? Wright: She woke up on December 23 with a scratchy throat. My wife decided to give her a home antigen test then, so we knew pretty early on with her first symptoms what was going on. Over the next 48 hours, she had difficulty sleeping and had body aches, a slight headache, and a stuffy nose. Beyond that, it seemed to settle in her head, with congestion and a sore throat from post-nasal drip. She experienced it mainly as an upper respiratory illness. The Insider: What was your daughter’s reaction to catching Covid? Wright: Her heart sank a little when the home test strip showed a positive result. She said she was a bit worried about what was going to happen and revealed feeling guilty, as though she didn’t do everything perfectly to avoid getting it. We reassured her that she did nothing wrong and that all of these things that we do are to reduce the risk of transmission, but none of them are guaranteed. We also treated her time in isolation as a mini-vacation with plenty of movie nights on the couch and ice cream each evening. Between that and her realizing that she was recovering quickly, it seemed like her spirits stayed pretty high throughout the duration. The Insider: How did your younger daughter react to her sister being sick? Wright: She seemed to take things in stride. She is so used to wearing masks that it wasn’t a big deal to put one on in our house when we would hang out together. The Insider: Are your daughters more scared now of catching Covid? Wright: I don’t think they are scared, per se, and I think that’s because we haven’t lost anyone close to us, nor have we framed this pandemic as a terrifying thing. I know our oldest can conceptualize the magnitude of this pandemic, but we’ve always tried to speak honestly about the risk to kids. Our youngest doesn’t see this in terms of being scared of Covid. Both girls are more annoyed with it than anything and just want this to be over. Are you nervous because of Covid to have your kids go to school in person? At this point, not really. They are fully vaccinated, and their schools are doing a great job managing things in the best way possible. There is no easy answer anymore as to the threshold for what feels safe, but today, we feel that being in person at school is an acceptable level of risk. Anne “My son was sicker than I had anticipated. He had a fever for three days as high as 102.5°. He had a hard time sleeping and his body ached.” Anne, who lives in Trumbull, Conn. Is a school nurse. Her husband is a financial advisor. They have a 17-year-old daughter and a 14-year-old son. The Insider: Did it come as a surprise that that your son got Covid, or did he know that he had been exposed to it? Anne: He knew he had been exposed. He had a friend over and a couple of days later, that friend developed a fever and was diagnosed the next day. The Insider: Was it upsetting to your son when he was diagnosed? Anne: Yes, very. He is a basketball player and he knew this would take him out of basketball for a few weeks. The Insider: Was the rest of your family also upset? Anne: I felt badly because he loves to play and I knew this meant he would have to miss a few weeks. My husband felt badly for the same reason. My daughter was just afraid she would catch it and have to miss out socially. I was not overly concerned about his health because I knew he would most likely just have mild symptoms. The Insider: What symptoms did he end up having? Anne: He was sicker than I had anticipated. He had a fever for three days as high as 102.5°. He had a hard time sleeping and his body ached. He also had a mild cough and some nasal congestion. The Insider: Many people have gotten blasé about getting Covid. Is there a lesson here that it’s worse than you may think? Anne: Yes. I think the lesson is that you just never know. While one person may have very mild symptoms, others may be more serious and you just don’t know which version you, or your children, will get. I think it’s very important that people continue to take this virus seriously. The Insider: Do kids share the information about being vaccinated with their friends? Would a child know that his friend had NOT been vaccinated, the way an adult likely would? Anne: Yes, absolutely. Kids are very open about their status. The Insider: Would a child be avoided or shunned for not being vaccinated? Is there social pressure? Anne: I think there is a little social pressure, but just a little. Kids who are vaccinated seem very proud of their status. However, I have also encountered some kids who are very proud and vocal about their unvaccinated status. I absolutely think this comes from dinnertime conversations, where if there are parents who feel strongly one way or the other, this flows down to their children and is reflected in how they feel about vaccinations. I have not yet encountered a child or teenager who is embarrassed about their status, whether vaccinated or not. The Insider: When your son was sick, did you try to socially distance yourselves or was that impossible? Anne: I did my best. I wore a mask when I went into his room and did not linger. He used a bathroom that is separate from the rest of the family. He stayed in his bedroom. The Insider: Are you surprised that no one else in the family caught it? Anne: My husband did catch it! He had a very, very mild case with a very light positive line on a home test, but we counted it as a positive. I’m suspicious that my daughter and I had it the week before. We had very mild cold symptoms and both tested negative on a home test, but we may have. We were with family two days before he tested positive and no one caught it from him there, which surprised me greatly. The Insider: What are you seeing as the school nurse? A lot of cases? Anne: Yes. Quite a few. I keep thinking it will slow down, but I’ve had one a day the last few days. My school is very small, about 150 kids, and at this point about 20 have had it in the last three weeks. Plus many family members and four staff members. Our entire staff is vaccinated. I’ve had a few vaccinated kids get it, but the majority are unvaccinated. All symptoms have been mild so far. I am finding that it is spreading quickly through families. The Insider: What level of school is it? Anne: Pre-K through 8th grade. The Insider: Do kids ever ask you your opinion on vaccinations, or for advice? Anne: Kids ask a lot of questions about why is so-and-so absent, do they have Covid? I always tell them to mind their business. They don’t ask my opinion on vaccination but are always very excited to tell me when they get vaccinated. I’ve also vaccinated many of our students and my entire staff and I know how happy they are to get the vaccines. Most of my kids don’t seem afraid to catch Covid, with a few exceptions. I do get many, many inquiries from nervous parents, however. The Insider: There such a push-pull right now about remote vs. In-person school. Do you think the schools should close down for the time being? Anne: I really don’t and I feel very strongly about this. Last year we were fully open but offered a remote option. Some of the students who stayed home all year are having an incredibly difficult time coming back. It’s a massive loss of social and emotional learning. Students need to be in school for a wide variety of reasons. Many will not get food at home or need connection with an adult because of an unstable home situation. Parents cannot miss work time. The most important reason, in my opinion, is that remote learning widens an already very wide gap in learning and opportunity in higher-income vs. lower-income areas. It is not a sustainable model for many, many families and causes a huge amount of stress for parents who cannot afford time off from work or who may not have the resources to assist their children. I think it would be a major disservice to the schoolchildren in our country. Jodie "I worry about the long-term effects of Covid, but am grateful for his quick recovery." Jodie, who lives in New Orleans, is the aftercare director for a private school that includes nursery through eighth grade. She is divorced and has two kids, a 14-year-old boy and a 13-year-old girl. Her son came down with Covid last week. The Insider: Are you all vaccinated? Jodie: Yes. I’m boosted. The kids are scheduled to be boosted, but their age was just approved. The Insider: What symptoms does your son have now? Jodie: None. On Saturday, he had a cough, fever, heavy fatigue and no appetite. On Sunday, he was almost back to himself. He’s 100% today. I worry about the long-term effects of Covid, but am grateful for his quick recovery. The Insider: Has he been going to school in person? Jodie: Yes. The Insider: Do you have any idea how he got it? Is he aware of having been exposed to it? Jodie: He’s not aware. He catches the streetcar home every day and he plays basketball and weight lifts without a mask. The Insider: Have a lot of his friends also gotten sick? Jodie: Yes, but not the ones at school. The social ones from other neighborhoods. The Insider: You live in a conservative state. Is the vaccination rate low there? Is that a problem for your family’s health? Jodie: It’s low in the state, but high here in the city. No, it’s not a problem for us. The Insider: Do you worry about him getting Covid again, particularly at school? Would you prefer a remote option? Jodie: No. He might get it again. I hope not. But although he loves remote school because he likes being home, I think in-person is best for him. Susan “At the beginning, we were treating her as if she were radioactive!” Susan, an academic, lives with her husband and three children on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. The children attend a public elementary school. Her seven-year-old daughter tested positive for Covid in the beginning of January. The Insider: Have your kids been going to school in person? Susan: They were going to school all fall, but they didn’t go to school the week before Christmas because Omicron was surging, and we wanted to minimize exposure before our long-planned holiday plans.  Already that week, we knew many families who were getting sick. We planned reluctantly for them to return to school on January 3, even though we would have much preferred a remote option just during the short Omicron surge, but right before returning to school, one of the three tested positive. While the other two should have continued to go to school under Department of Education policies, we didn’t think it right to expose their classes, so we kept all three home. The Insider: With three kids. I’m surprised they all didn’t get it! Susan: I am shocked, too!  And neither my husband nor I got it, either.  We were lucky in many ways to have been able to take immediate action when we learned she was positive. We had good masks that we all wore around the apartment – double-masked, in fact!  Our daughter slept and ate in a room by herself so that she was never unmasked around us. And we purchased air filters that we moved around the apartment to whichever room she was in.  We were exposed to her, of course, in the days prior to her positive test, so it’s surprising we didn’t get infected then.  But we really did try to protect ourselves after–who knows what combination of those tricks was successful? Of course, all of us are also vaccinated (and the adults boosted), which surely played some role. The Insider: How did you explain what was going on to her? Was she upset? Susan: She was very upset, and our immediate reactions surely didn’t help.  She knew very well that we had been trying for nearly two years to avoid infection at all cost. So I’m sure it was as much of a shock and disappointment to her as it was to us. But of course, it was worse for her because at the beginning, we were treating her as if she were radioactive! She would ask us not to tell people we were talking to, or say that on Zoom calls with her friends, she didn’t want to talk about Covid. She also didn’t like having to eat alone in her room. The thing that helped the most were screens! She, and all of the kids, got a lot more screen-time on their iPads and on computers than they otherwise get. After the immediate scramble, we did reassure her that this was, of course, not her fault. She had been absolutely diligent with masks and with all precautions. And she was incredibly responsible during the week we were isolating. She never came out of her room without her double masks, and she never complained about having to wear them. She was more diligent than any of us about wearing masks and not so much as sipping water in the same room as others. The Insider: God bless Zoom, right? Who would have ever thought that it could be so useful. Susan: She enjoyed some Zoom and FaceTime playdates with friends. One of her best friends from school had dinner with her a couple of nights over FaceTime. That really cheered her up. But given what’s possible with Zoom, it’s disappointing that the city has not made any arrangements for remote learning for students who are isolating with infection or because of exposure. Despite how easy remote learning would be as an accommodation, the city provides no instruction to kids who are isolating at home. The Insider: What kind of symptoms did she have? Did she have a fever? Susan: No! Her only symptoms were roughly 12-24 hours of some congestion and sneezing. At one point, her voice was a little raspy. That was it! Under normal circumstances, we would have thought absolutely nothing of it. The only reason we thought to test was when her sibling reported that she was sneezing throughout the night.  But she didn’t sneeze even once after the positive test.  I don’t know if we owe that to the vaccine or to luck, but I am very grateful. The Insider: How old are your two other children? How did they react to their sister’s situation? Susan: They are five and nine. I was so proud of all of them for how they handled the situation. They were concerned at first, knowing as she did that we have been so worried about exposure and getting infected. We tried to keep her isolated her in room in general, but there is no keeping these siblings apart! So we knew that wouldn’t last. We explained that they could be together if they were diligent with their masks and sat close to the air filters, for whatever that was worth, and they faithfully complied. The oldest was most diligent with her mask wearing and with following the rules. The youngest whined about having to wear the mask all the time in the apartment, because we were in the apartment all the time, but she understood it was necessary. When my daughter finally tested negative after a full week, her siblings were elated. I captured their reactions on video. The youngest gave her a huge hug, and the oldest couldn’t contain her joy. The Insider: Bottom line: Are you going to send your kids back to school now, or keep them at home? Susan: They have now missed two and a half weeks of school. As much as I’d like to avoid the “Petri dish” as your columnist Carly Mitchell rightfully described it, I don’t feel we have an option. So we plan to send them back tomorrow for the first time since December 20. I hope that we do not have a follow-up interview for the next child to test positive! Sofia “She was mainly upset because she had to miss school for six school days and didn’t want to.” Sofia, who lives in Seattle, is a teacher. Her husband is also a teacher. They have an eight-year-old daughter and a 12-year-old son. Their daughter caught Covid over the holidays in December. The Insider: Did it come as a surprise to you that your daughter had Covid? Sofia: Yes it did. We hadn’t been around anyone who had Covid that we knew of, and most of the time spent around others in the prior week had been outdoors: skiing, sledding, etc. That said, we spent some time with the grandparents and some uncles, and maybe one of them was contagious without knowing it. But I don’t know where she got it. It’s also possible that my son got it before her and she got it from him. He had a runny nose for a while so he may have had Covid. When he got tested, he was negative, so we don’t know if he had it or not. My husband tested positive as well. I never did but I also think I likely had it around the same time as my daughter. We all had mild coldlike symptoms for a day or two, on days near each other, but nothing major. It was all during school vacation. I got a rapid test before school began and tested negative. By then, I felt fine, so I didn’t get another test. The Insider: Nobody had any symptoms other than you would get with a cold? Sofia: True. My daughter’s symptoms were a small sore throat for two days and a little cough, and on one of the days she was tired and took a nap, which is rare for her. But it was also New Year’s Day and she had been up late the night before. My symptoms were a runny nose and a small sore throat and a little fatigue. My son just had a very runny nose. My husband had a little cough and slight sore throat. Again, all of these were just for a couple days. This is similar to friends I have who have gotten Covid recently. All are vaxxed and many are boosted. The Insider: How did she react emotionally to having Covid. Sofia: She was mainly upset because she had to miss school for six school days and didn’t want to. She now tells me that she was a little scared about the fact that it was Covid, but I didn’t know that at the time. She didn’t express fear to us. The Insider: Are your kids in school now in-person? Sofia: They are. My kids’ school is open. They hope to stay that way, but they have contingency plans if needed. They test everyone weekly or more often and are doing “test to stay” for students who are close contacts of others. The Insider: Which would you prefer now for your kids—in-person or remote? Sofia: In-person. The Insider: Aren’t you worried about them getting sick again? Sofia: No. Now that they have been sick, it’s unlikely they’ll get it again right away. And if they do, it will likely be mild, and I feel like we have entered a new stage of the virus where it is less severe and we need to keep doing life. Of course, I don’t want the hospitals to be overrun, and I fully blame unvaccinated adults for that unfortunate circumstance. But we live in a highly vaccinated place, and most people are wearing masks out and about, and I think we shouldn’t go back to isolation if we can avoid it. Being in school in person is clearly way better for most kids and families, and that’s my preference as a parent and as a teacher. Alyson “My youngest had Covid for a second time. Two New Year’s Eves in a row. She tested positive the Monday after Christmas.” Alyson is a real estate investor and a licensed home improvement contractor. She purchases homes, oversee the remodeling and puts them back on the market. Her husband is a recruiter. They have three children, ages 13, 16 and 17. The Insider: Were you shocked when your daughter got sick again? Alyson: This time, yes. My husband and son were so sick and so I tested everyone in my house. Only my daughter was positive and the two that were actually sick had negative PCR tests. She had no symptoms. My son who was sick is 17, and my other son is 16. Both were negative, although my 17-year-old was in bed for a week. I guess you can still get old-fashioned sick! Even though both my sons and my husband were negative and my daughter was positive, I quarantined all of them. The Insider: That’s mysterious! Had everyone been vaccinated? Alyson: Everyone is vaccinated. I am the only one in my house who has had the booster so far. The Insider: So your daughter probably hadn’t been vaccinated yet before her first illness, right? Alyson: When she had Covid last year, my husband and I had it at the same time. None of us had been vaccinated at that time. The Insider: How sick were all of you the first time, when you were unvaccinated? Alyson: My husband was the worst of the three of us. It was similar to the flu for him, for about 3-4 days. My daughter just had a slight cough and I had chest pains for one night and was tired. Back then, it was a longer quarantine so it was awful. The Insider: How long did your daughter need to stay home recently, even though she had no symptoms? Alyson: This time, the only thing my daughter suffered from was boredom. It was miserable for her. Especially because once she came out of her five days of quarantine, our school district has crazy sports rules. She was able to go back to school at Day 6, but had to get cleared by a doctor on Day 10 and then be monitored for another seven days before she was able to return to play basketball. That’s a long 17 days for a very active 13-year-old who lives for whatever sport season she is in. Ironically when she finally was able to return to play, the next day the rules changed! It was pure torture for her, especially because she was never sick. Not even one sniffle The Insider: Are you worried about your kids being in a classroom at this point? Alyson: My oldest goes to private school and they did remote school for the week after break, which I liked. The public school went right back and people were getting Covid left and right. I’m trying to trust science. Before break I was very worried because my daughter was contact-traced three times that week. We tested her the day before we were going to travel, because I was worried about her bringing something to my 80-year-old parents. Had online school been an option the week before or after break, I would have felt better. I’m most worried about my 16-year-old now. My daughter should have antibodies for the near future but he doesn’t. My 17-year-old gets tested every week at school so I’m not as worried about him. My 16-year-old is in a school with 2,500 people. That alone is nerve-wracking. Adding Covid doesn’t help. But he needs to be in a classroom. His mental health is not one that can go back to online school. It’s not how kids and even we adults and parents should be living. The anxiety that builds around it all is just awful. I told my kids that I pray this was the last worst New Year’s they ever have.

By Andy Borowitz January 18, 2022 TALLAHASSEE (The Borowitz Report)—As he explores a bid for the 2024 Republican Presidential nomination, Governor Ron DeSantis is betting that G.O.P. voters are looking for a stupider version of Donald J. Trump. According to a source close to DeSantis, the Florida Governor has decided to “run to the stupid of Trump” to pick up the support of voters who now consider the former President too intellectual. “When Trump recently said that he got the booster, that was the last straw,” the source said. “In the eyes of a lot of Republicans, Trump is basically Fauci now.” “Trump’s surrender to science is a slippery slope,” the source added. “It’s only a matter of time before he starts flirting with geography and grammar.” As DeSantis stakes his claim to the dumber-than-Trump lane, he spoke at a fund-raising event over the weekend. “Donald Trump believes that one plus one equals two,” the Governor told his audience. “I think the American people should be free to decide for themselves what one plus one equals.” Andy Borowitz is a Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes The Borowitz Report, a satirical column on the news.

By Carly Mitchell, Teacher / New York City (The author is using a pseudonym for professional reasons) I am happy to report that students across the country are striking back at policymakers who refuse to provide a safe virtual learning option. Here in New York City, on January 11 at 11:52 a.m., members of the student ranks of Stuyvesant High School in Manhattan, Brooklyn Technical High School, and a few other schools scattered throughout the five boroughs, protested current conditions in their classrooms by walking out of their schools. Details about the event were advertised on an Instagram page, “Nycstudentwalkout2022”. A student’s post from January 8 explained the reason for the coordinated protest. “The ultimate goal of the walkout is to garner attention from policymakers that can help close down schools temporarily. Remote and/or hybrid instruction will occur in the meantime, until Covid cases drop from the current spike.” It appears to have worked, at least for the moment. While it is unclear how many young people participated in the event, the “Nycstudentwalkout2022” page reported that they received the attention of Chancellor David C. Banks, who Tweeted that same afternoon, “The best decisions are made when everyone has a seat at the table– I’m inviting student leaders to meet with me so we can work together for safe and open schools.” Similar events are happening across the country. Middle and high school students in Oakland, California wrote a petition to the school district, board, and the superintendent. In the petition, students griped that they were not comfortable coming to school as Covid cases continue to soar. They called for a remote learning option, and better safety measures such as providing KN95 or N95 masks for students and weekly PCR testing. Befitting the long tradition of activism in California schools, the students were nothing if not forceful. “The district has one week, starting Monday, January 10th, to meet our demands” the petition thundered. “If the demands are not met by Monday, January 17th, students will strike starting Tuesday, January 18th by not going to school. Friday January 21st, we will strike outside the OUSD Building and it will last until the demands are met.” So far, more than 1,200 students have signed. Across the country in Chicago, students from several schools walked out of their classes on January 14. Bloomberg.com reported, “The protest, organized by the Chicago Public School’s Radical Youth Alliance, came days after the nation’s third-largest district returned to in-person learning after a week-long dispute between the teachers’ union and Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who pressed for schools to be open.” As a public-school teacher in Brooklyn who just recovered from Covid, I am thrilled to watch thousands of students finding their voices. The past month has been a nightmare. I receive at least three emails a week informing me that I have been exposed to Covid. Attendance is down, colleagues have fallen ill, and everyone in my school building is exhausted. Virtual learning is not an ideal solution–as I wrote last week, nobody likes virtual learning–but at what point will the bigwigs in charge decide that enough is enough? Student and teacher concerns are similar across the country. Classrooms tend to be overcrowded, proper PPE is not provided, and testing measures are inadequate. Adding to the deteriorating situation is a nationwide teacher and substitute shortage. On January 6, a New York City high school student lamented via a Reddit post which has since gone viral that students were not learning anything because so many teachers were out. I can attest to this. Since we returned from break two weeks ago, the halls in my middle school in Brooklyn are noticeably emptier of both teachers and students because so many people have tested positive. Some savvy school districts in the country have taken the hint and gone virtual, like the Cleveland Metro Schools and a number of schools in New Jersey. But sadly, there is no definitive word on what is going to happen in New York City. In a news conference on January 13, Mayor Eric Adams backpedaled on his hardline in-person-school-or-nothing, and told reporters, “We will find the right way to educate our children in a very safe environment and if we’re able to put in place a temporarily remote option, we’re welcome to do so.” Many educators in New York, including many of my colleagues, took this to mean that perhaps we would be offered a virtual learning option. But only one day later at a press briefing, Adams waffled. “I don’t know if there was a misinterpretation of what I said yesterday. Schools are not closing. I want to be very clear on that. We are not closing schools.” Is that clear, New York City? I do not think students at the middle school where I teach will be participating in walk-outs anytime soon. This is not to say that they are not politically minded, opinionated, or on the path to becoming activists. Rather, many of my students are just exhausted and overwhelmed by the past year and a half. I think that like their teachers, they feel like they do not have a say in any of this. For now, Gotham’s teachers sit in limbo, wondering if we will be heard or if the flip-flop political rhetoric will continue. I am willing to bet on the latter. In the meantime, I will continue to show up, teach to the best of my ability, and weather the storm. Carly Mitchell (a pseudonym) is a public-school teacher in Brooklyn N.Y. who loves to learn, to educate, and to expose the hypocrisy of New York City politicians.

By Jessie Seigel / Washington, D.C. The Supreme Court protects itself well from Covid-19. Since the pandemic began, the Court has been closed to outside visitors. For much of the time, the justices worked by teleconference. But since October, when they began hearing oral arguments in person again, all attorneys, whether or not they are vaccinated, have been required to take a PCR test at a Court-designated facility. They must test negative to enter the building and are required to wear an N95 or KN95 respirator while there except while presenting their arguments, eating or drinking. Even given these protections, the nine justices also have the option to work remotely. Yet, last week, in a 6-3 vote, with the liberals dissenting, the Court blocked the Biden Administration from enforcing a temporary emergency workplace standard adopted by OSHA (the Occupational Safety and Health Agency) that would provide a modicum of workplace safety for the rest of us. The OSHA temporary workplace standard—which by statute would only last six months—is far less strict than that the Court has set up for its own workplace. It provides simply for employers with at least 100 employees to require that a worker either be vaccinated against Covid or take a weekly Covid test and wear a mask at work. As the Washington Post noted: “The OSHA case is fundamentally about the power of the government to protect workers — who, unlike the justices, have no power to create safe working conditions for themselves.” The reasoning of the unsigned majority opinion is so transparently untenable as not to warrant even the dignity of calling it an exercise in sophistry. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a concurring opinion, relying on very similar arguments, in which fellow conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined. That no one put his or her name as author to the majority opinion (by process of elimination, it must have been Justice John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, or Amy Coney Barrett) suggests that the author doesn’t dare take credit for writing it lest doing so tarnish his or her individual reputation. Even before writing his concurring opinion, Gorsuch showed his disdain for Covid protections by sitting on the bench maskless while hearing the arguments concerning the OSHA vaccine standard. The 83-year-old Justice Stephen Breyer, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who suffers from diabetes, were thus faced with the choice of chancing viral exposure or attending remotely. They attended remotely. Though they have not stated that the maskless Gorsuch was their reason, his callous behavior put them in that position. Gorsuch’s cavalier refusal to wear a mask not only exposed his fellow jurists to insult and potential injury but constituted a public demonstration of his flagrantly biased prejudgment against the need for a workplace rule even before he had heard arguments. The Flaws in the Court’s So-Called Reasoning The Appellate Court for the Fifth Circuit initially stayed OSHA’s emergency temporary standard while its legality was being challenged in a number of courts across the country. But the Sixth Circuit subsequently lifted the stay, allowing the requirement to take effect. The challengers appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that OSHA’s requirement exceeded OSHA’s statutory authority. In reinstituting the stay, the Court majority’s main argument is that the risk of contracting Covid-19 does not qualify as a work-related occupational hazard because, in addition to the workplace, it spreads wherever people gather, and therefore is a universal risk “no different from other day-to-day hazards of daily life.” The Atlantic rightly called this “laughable logic,” pointing out that “The fact that you can die in a fire in your apartment is not an argument against regulating fire hazards in factories or offices.” Though eschewing The Atlantic’s sarcasm, the Court’s dissenting opinion, authored by Justice Breyer, in which Justices Sotomayor and Kagan joined, thoroughly demolishes the majority’s argument. Breyer stated that the virus “perfectly fits” the language within the statutory requirements for an emergency temporary standard since the Covid virus is a “new hazard” as well as a “physically harmful” “agent. It also poses a “grave danger” to millions of employees. Breyer wrote: “As of the time OSHA promulgated its rule, more than 725,000 Americans had died of Covid-19 and millions more had been hospitalized…In the last week alone, it has caused, or helped to cause, more than 11,000 new deaths…And because the disease spreads in shared indoor spaces, it presents heightened dangers in most workplaces.” Breyer pointed out that the majority does not contest this assessment of the virus’s workplace danger, and that it does not matter whether those hazards also exist beyond the workplace—so long as they exist in the workplace. And, clearly, they do. Furthermore, quoting OSHA’s argument, the dissent stated: “‘[D]uring the workday, workers may have little ability to limit contact with co-workers, clients, members of the public, patients, and others, any one of whom could represent a source of exposure to’ the virus.” Purporting to defend individual freedoms, the majority has claimed the requirement to be vaccinated or tested and wear a mask is “a significant encroachment into the lives—and health—of a vast number of employees.” However, the majority makes no mention of the viral threat’s encroachment on the lives, health and possible deaths of employees who must work despite exposure to those who do not get vaccinated, tested, or wear masks. As Ruth Marcus wrote in the Washington Post, “In the majority’s worldview, the interests of those workers are nowhere to be found.” The majority cites, on one hand, the challengers’ claim of the billions of dollars in “unrecoverable compliance costs” and “hundreds of thousands of employees forced to leave their jobs” if the OSHA requirement is not stayed. It also cites, on the other hand, the Federal government’s claim that the temporary requirement will save over 6,500 lives and prevent hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations. The majority then sententiously states: “It is not our role to weigh such trade-offs.” But in staying the OSHA requirement, that is exactly what this ultra-conservative Court has done. And it has weighed in favor of moneyed business interests. What a surprise! The dissent, for its part, gives life the greater weight, stating: “The public interest here—the interest in protecting workers from disease and death—overwhelms the employers’ alleged costs… OSHA estimated that in six months the emergency standard would save over 6500 lives and prevent over 250,000 hospitalizations. Tragically those estimates may prove too conservative.” The Legal Standard Betrayed As the agency with expertise in workplace health and safety, OSHA’s determinations are supposed to be “conclusive if supported by substantial evidence.” Where OSHA meets that test, as it did here, judicial review is supposed to defer to OSHA’s judgment. Furthermore, to obtain a stay pending appellate review, applicants must show that: (1) their claims are likely to prevail, (2) denying them relief would lead to irreparable injury, and (3) granting relief would not harm the public interest. Though the majority opined that the challengers were likely to prevail, it never even addressed whether denying the stay would lead to irreparable harm or whether granting it would harm the public interest. The dissent addressed all of these questions, and well supported its view that none of these requirements were met. The Atlantic suggested that the right-wing justices’ reasoning followed the views and interests of their political coalition, saying: “Their academic pedigrees and social status do not insulate them from adjusting their views to fit those of the community they have chosen.” The publication added: “The Court is a site of political combat, and its composition and rulings reflect that reality, not the illusion of impartiality that the justices and their advocates insist on putting forth as a way to defend the legitimacy of the Court’s right-wing majority.” In an MSNBC interview, Howard Dean recently said of this decision: “This is just right-wing zealotry. Three justices—Alito, Thomas and Coney Barrett—have complained that people think the Court is made of partisan hacks. Well, it is.” I couldn’t agree more. To some degree the Supreme Court as an institution has never been utterly impartial. The notion that a judge can entirely put aside his or her biases is a fiction. The biases just present themselves as so-called judicial philosophy. That said, the right-wing justices on the current court are not even making a pretense of judicial independence. They are acting as a legal adjunct to the right-wing putsch, of which anti-vaccination and anti-federal regulation are a part. Something must be done to reestablish the court’s dedication to the Rule of Law. It is time to seriously consider adding justices—ones who are not hacks--to the Court. Political columnist Jessie Seigel had a long career as a government attorney in which she honed her analytic skills. She has also twice received an Artist’s Fellowship from the Washington, D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities for her fiction, and has been a finalist for a number of literary awards. In addition, Seigel is an associate editor at the Potomac Review, a reviewer for The Washington Independent Review of Books, and a dabbler in political cartoons at Daily Kos. Of this balance in her work between the analytic and the imaginative, Seigel jokes, “I guess my right and left brains are well-balanced.” More on and from Seigel can be found at The Adventurous Writer, https://www.jessieseigel.com.