Skip to main content

United States Supreme Court Rejects Vaccine Mandate Appeal…Would a Similar Ruling Be Expected in the Employment Context?


In recent weeks, United States Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett rejected an appeal from Indiana University students that sought to contest the lawfulness of Indiana University’s coronavirus vaccine mandate as a condition of enrollment for the fall 2021 semester.

As readers might have likely seen, vaccine mandates in the workplace (and elsewhere) have become a hot button issue.  With the rejection of the appeal, Indiana University can lawfully require students to be vaccinated in order to attend classes this fall.  However, the fact that Justice Barrett did not comment on the rejection of the appeal has left some questions as to whether the Supreme Court is indicating its agreement with vaccine mandates…or if this rejection of the appeal was more focused on the specific facts of the Indiana University case and would not necessarily apply to other related situations.

Although the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had released guidance earlier this year that employers could mandate vaccines as a condition of employment (with exceptions for religious or medical reasons), these mandates have been relatively untested in court so far.  (Notwithstanding a decision from a court in Texas finding vaccine mandates for employees at a hospital to be lawful.)  With that being said, there is some precedent, that vaccine mandates are lawful (as set out in a 1905 Supreme Court opinion in Jacobson v. Massachusetts.)  However, whether a rather dusty case from over a century ago would still hold up in regard to a mandatory coronavirus vaccine policy in the workplace remains to be seen.

Something tells me that sooner or later, the Supreme Court is likely going to weigh in on the matter rather than simply rejecting an appeal without comment, as happened in this case.


For additional information:  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/us/supreme-court-indiana-university-covid-vaccine-mandate.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more