Evidence cuts both ways on this prediction.

Ways the prediction looks right (country moved out of “pandemic politics”):

• Nearly all state and local mask mandates and other COVID restrictions were lifted by early–mid 2022; by April 2022, general mask mandates had ended in every state, with remaining rules limited to narrow settings like some health-care facilities.(en.wikipedia.org)
• The federal COVID-19 national emergency and public health emergency were formally ended in spring 2023, an explicit policy signal that the emergency phase was over and that extraordinary pandemic-era measures were being wound down.(abccolumbia.com)
• By 2022 and afterward, COVID largely disappeared as a top voting issue. Polling on the 2022 midterms and the 2024 cycle shows voters prioritizing inflation, the broader economy, abortion, immigration, and “extremism / threats to democracy,” with COVID only registering in low single digits as the “most important problem.”(news.gallup.com)
• Retrospective polling in 2025 finds Americans mainly arguing about whether there were too many or too few restrictions and rating officials’ performance, rather than pushing for new large-scale mandates—suggesting the active phase of pandemic policy conflict has passed.(pewresearch.org)

Ways the prediction looks wrong (politics did not broadly moderate):

• Overall U.S. politics did not notably moderate in the 2022–2025 period. Surveys show rising concern about political extremism and threats to democracy as the top national problem heading into 2024, ahead of even the economy, indicating that intense polarization and radical rhetoric persisted—just on other fronts.(reuters.com)
• Analyses of the 2020 and 2024 elections argue that while COVID-era policies (lockdowns, school closures, mandates) have mostly ended, their aftershocks reshaped the electorate in a more hard-edged, distrustful direction (e.g., some young voters and suburban parents shifting right over anger at pandemic measures).(axios.com) This is closer to a long-term radicalization than a simple “correction of overreaction.”

Why this is rated ambiguous:

• If you interpret Sacks narrowly—“we will leave behind the specific, COVID-centered era of mandates and pandemic-driven policy fights”—that forecast largely came true: emergency powers expired, mandates ended, and COVID faded as a core political issue.
• If you interpret him more broadly—“the radical strain of politics that the pandemic bred will unwind and national politics will moderate”—the data don’t really support that. Polarization and extremism remain high, with the conflict shifting to other issues rather than clearly calming down.

Because one key part of his claim (exit from pandemic-centric politics) is supported by events, while another key part (overall moderation of national politics) is not, and because the quote mixes these ideas, the fairest overall judgment is “ambiguous.”