VACCINE MANDATES FALL IN FEDERAL COURTS

 Former President Donald Trump responded to the onset of the coronavirus by initiating "Operation Warp Speed," a series of moves designed to produce one or more vaccines available to the general public in record time.  Personally, although I lauded the intent of these initiatives, I had grave doubts as to the safety and effectiveness of such a vaccine.  Although there are many safe vaccines on the market, there has never been a safe and effective vaccine produced in less than 3 1/2 years.  My fears were not lessened by the granting of immunity to the vaccine makers for deaths or adverse consequences experienced by those receiving the vaccines, or by assurances by the CDC that earlier this year when deaths associated with those taking the vaccines exceeded 10,000, taking the vaccine was a safer choice than not taking the vaccine.

Since the rollout of the Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson vaccines, studies have been done on the vaccines with disappointing results.  In Israel, where over 62% of the population has been vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, it has been shown that those who have had Covid and recovered are 13 times less likely to be infected with the Covid Delta variant than vaccinated individuals; the majority of those hospitalized for COVID-19 in Israel are persons who have been fully vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine. 

In the face of this evidence, the current administration has gone beyond making the vaccines available to all teens and adults for free; it has mandated, in various industries, that persons employed in those industries receive the vaccine.  Along with the mandate, the administration has stated that no employee citing sincerely-held religious beliefs against receiving the vaccine will not be terminated while their request to be relieved of the vaccine requirement on this basis is pending. 

The religious exception is the one people jump on immediately to avoid vaccination.  However, proving your religion prohibits vaccines is tough.  Moslems can claim this exemption, because Islamic religious authorities have maintained vaccines contain pork products, and Moslems should not have their bodies defiled in this way.  Christian Scientists and Dutch Reformed adherents also publicly discourage their members from receiving vaccines.  Roman Catholics, on the other hand, are on very shaky ground claiming a religious exemption, because their church openly supports vaccines in general.

In short, most persons claiming a sincerely-held religious belief that they should not be vaccinated will fail to be exempted from the federal vaccine mandate.

Are these mandates legal?

Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the Biden Administration's vaccine mandates.  Recently, the challengers have succeeded in stopping them.

On November 6, 2021, a Louisiana federal court issued an injunction against the federal government stopping its requirement that private businesses with 100 or more workers have all of them vaccinated  or wear a mask, and that they be tested weekly.  This ruling affected 84 million workers.

On November 29, U.S. District Judge Matthew Schlep in the Eastern District of Missouri blocked the federal government from mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for health care workers in ten states (Nebraska, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, Wyoming, Alaska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Missouri, and New Hampshire) that joined in a lawsuit against the Biden Administration.  The judge wrote that the Biden Administration did not seek permission of Congress before issuing its mandate (it was acting without any law authorizing such action).  

The judge wrote a scathing rebuke of the Administration in striking down the mandate:

"Truly, the impact of this mandate reaches far beyond COVID.  CMS seeks to overtake an area of traditional state authority by imposing an unprecedented demand to federally dictate the private medical decisions of millions of Americans.  Such action challenges traditional notions of federalism."

Additionally, the judge found the mandates "arbitrary and capricious," a term which is a death knell to legislation or executive action:

"No one questions that protecting patients and health care workers from contracting COVID is a laudable objective.  But the court cannot, in good faith, allow CMS to enact an unprecedented mandate that lacks a 'rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.'"

It is important to note the Court's ruling does not affect the thousands of persons required to be vaccinated by employers choosing to require vaccinations without federal government coercion.

On November 30, a U.S. District Court judge in Kentucky issued a preliminary injunction stopping the U.S. government from enforcing a vaccine mandate for those who do business with the federal government.  The lawsuit was filed on behalf on federal contractors in Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee against the Biden Administration.   A preliminary injunction is a temporary win for the person filing the suit, on the basis that the action of the government appears likely to be unconstitutional, so the action by the government will be stayed until the court reaches a final result.  

The lawsuits against the federal government concerning vaccines will continue, as there are many more suits filed and final results will not be issued for months.