Always one for sounding off like a far-left political pundit, CNN medical analyst and George Washington University doctor Jonathan Reiner joined Friday morning's CNN Newsroom to sound off on the Supreme Court striking down President Biden's vaccine mandate for large businesses as "shameful," accusing the Court of hypocrisy. But, in reality, he just showed he doesn't know how broad mandates work.
Guest co-host Bianna Golodryga prefaced her plea by maintaining Reiner is not a legal analyst, "but you are a health expert and from that perspective, I'd love to get your reaction to what we heard from the Supreme Court yesterday, blocking the administration's mandate for businesses, large businesses to impose vaccines and testing but allowing them for some hospitals that provide Medicare and Medicaid help."
"I'm curious, did that ruling make sense from your perspective and what's your take on it," she added.
Reiner immediately decided to affirm Golodryga's assessment that he is not a legal expert, because he completely ignored the part about the Court allowing another mandate to stand: "No. I mean, I thought that the obvious political leanings of the Court were shown in that decision."
Ignoring several instance of misinformation from liberal justices, Reiner lamented: "I was also struck by the astonishing lack of information as evidence by some of the questions posed by some of the justices, particularly Justice Thomas, completely misquoting data and misunderstanding how this virus is spread and, you know, the Court's decision, which basically said that workplaces by and large are not risky places to acquire the virus."
Reiner also claimed the Court was being hypocritical in its rulings: "You can’t enter that Court unless you are vaccinated and tested. So the Court has cloaked themselves in protections that most workplaces don't have, yet they would withhold that from, you know, millions of workers in the United States. I thought it was a shameful decision."
The Supreme Court, whose justices are disproportionately older than the average workplace, has rules that govern itself. What that has to do with the executive branch trying to force private businesses to do the same is something Reiner couldn't explain, but it wasn't the first time the doctor wandered out of his lane.
This segment was sponsored by T-Mobile. Their contact information is linked.
Here is a transcript of the January 14 show. Click "expand" to read.
CNN Newsroom with Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto
January 14, 2022
10:19 a.m. EasternBIANNA GOLODRYGA: I'll preface this question by noting the obvious, and that is that I don't believe you are a legal analyst, but — but you are a health expert and from that perspective, I'd love to get your reaction to what we heard from the Supreme Court yesterday, blocking the administration's mandate for businesses, large businesses to impose vaccines and testing but allowing them for some hospitals that provide Medicare and Medicaid help. I'm curious, did that ruling make sense from your perspective and what's your take on it?
JONATHAN REINER: No. I mean, I thought that the obvious political leanings of the Court were shown in that decision and I'll — I'll — I was also struck by the astonishing lack of information as evidence by some of the questions posed by some of the justices, particularly Justice Thomas, completely mis — misquoting data and misunderstanding how this virus is spread and, you know, the Court's decision, which basically said that workplaces by and large are not risky places to acquire the virus be — counter to what the Court has set up. You can’t enter that Court —
JIM SCIUTTO: Yeah.
REINER: — unless you are vaccinated and tested. So the Court has cloaked themselves in protections that most workplaces don't have, yet they would withhold that from, you know, millions of workers in the United States. I thought it was —
SCIUTTO: Yeah.
REINER: — a shameful decision.
SCIUTTO: Ariane de Vogue, our Supreme Court reporter, made that point last hour that the justices themselves? vaccinated.
