(Trends Wide) — The Supreme Court blocked the large business vaccination or testing requirement that had been defined by President Joe Biden’s administration, but allowed a vaccination mandate for certain healthcare workers to go into effect nationwide.
The ruling blocking the rule for large companies was based on the argument that Congress did not give the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) the power to enact such a mandate.
“While Congress has indisputably given OSHA the power to regulate occupational hazards, it has not given that agency the power to regulate public health more broadly. Demand the vaccination of 84 million Americans, selected simply because they work. for employers with more than 100 employees, it certainly falls into the latter category, “reads the unsigned opinion.
Liberal Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan disagreed.
“When we are wise, we know not to displace the judgments of the experts, acting within the sphere set by Congress and under presidential control, to face emergency conditions,” they wrote.
“Today we are not wise. Faced with a pandemic that still continues, this Court tells the agency in charge of protecting the safety of workers that it may not do so in all the necessary workplaces. As diseases and deaths continue to rise, this Court tells the agency that it cannot respond in the most effective way possible. “
The Biden administration’s argument in favor of the vaccination mandate
The rule would affect about 80 million people and requires employers with 100 or more employees to make sure their employees are fully vaccinated or undergo regular testing and face covering at work. There are exceptions for those with religious objections.
The agency said it had the authority to act under a temporary emergency standard designed to protect employees if they are exposed to “serious danger.”
The Biden administration defended the regulation, arguing that the nation is facing a pandemic “that is sickening and killing thousands of workers across the country” and that any delay in implementing the requirement to get vaccinated or undergo periodic tests “will result in lead to unnecessary harm, illness, hospitalization and death. “
During oral arguments, the Biden administration had asked that, at a minimum, if the court says employers cannot require employees to be vaccinated, it should leave in place an alternative requirement for the use of masks and frequent testing. The majority rejected that request on Thursday.
Steve Vladeck, a Trends Wide Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law, said the ruling on the trade mandate could have far-reaching effects in future cases on the power of government.
“These cases were not referendums on vaccination mandates, which can still come from states, local governments and private companies, they were referendums on whether these types of political decisions by experts are better taken by experts from agencies responsible to the president or by judges responsible. to anyone, “Vladeck said. “And if the answer is the latter, that will be true long after, and in contexts far beyond, the immediate response to the covid pandemic.”
Mandate for health workers
Although judges were receptive to previous attempts by states to require vaccines, the new disputes centered on federal requirements that raised different legal issues.
Cases come to the Supreme Court in an unusual stance, because justices are only being asked to block requirements while legal challenges unfold.
The court allowed the vaccination policy implemented in November by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services of the US Department of Health and Human Services to take effect, which sought to require the Covid-19 vaccine for certain workers in the United States. medical care in hospitals, nursing homes, and other facilities that participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
According to government estimates, the mandate regulates more than 10.3 million healthcare workers in the United States. Covered personnel were originally supposed to receive the first dose by December 6, and the mandate allows for some religious and medical exemptions.
Two lower courts had blocked the mandate in 24 states.
Judge Samuel Alito, along with Conservatives Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, disagreed.
“Neither CMS nor the Court articulate a limiting principle of why, after an unexplained and unwarranted delay, an agency can regulate first and listen later, and then put more than 10 million healthcare workers to choose between their jobs or irreversible medical treatment, “Alito wrote.
Biden, disappointed
President Joe Biden responded to the Supreme Court’s decision to block his administration’s vaccination requirement or the proof requirement of large companies, but allow the vaccination mandate for certain healthcare workers.
Today’s Supreme Court decision to uphold the healthcare worker requirement will save lives – the lives of patients seeking care at medical facilities, as well as the lives of the doctors, nurses, and others who work there. ”Biden wrote. “It will cover 10.4 million health workers in 76,000 medical facilities. We will enforce it ”.
“At the same time, I am disappointed that the Supreme Court has chosen to block common sense life-saving requirements for employees of large companies that were directly based on both science and the law,” the president said, calling on the testing requirements and the use of mask “a very modest load”.
Going forward, the president said that “it is now up to individual states and employers to determine whether to make their workplaces as safe as possible for employees, and whether their businesses will be safe for consumers during this pandemic by requiring them to employees who take the simple and effective steps to get vaccinated ”.
(Trends Wide) — The Supreme Court blocked the large business vaccination or testing requirement that had been defined by President Joe Biden’s administration, but allowed a vaccination mandate for certain healthcare workers to go into effect nationwide.
The ruling blocking the rule for large companies was based on the argument that Congress did not give the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) the power to enact such a mandate.
“While Congress has indisputably given OSHA the power to regulate occupational hazards, it has not given that agency the power to regulate public health more broadly. Demand the vaccination of 84 million Americans, selected simply because they work. for employers with more than 100 employees, it certainly falls into the latter category, “reads the unsigned opinion.
Liberal Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan disagreed.
“When we are wise, we know not to displace the judgments of the experts, acting within the sphere set by Congress and under presidential control, to face emergency conditions,” they wrote.
“Today we are not wise. Faced with a pandemic that still continues, this Court tells the agency in charge of protecting the safety of workers that it may not do so in all the necessary workplaces. As diseases and deaths continue to rise, this Court tells the agency that it cannot respond in the most effective way possible. “
The Biden administration’s argument in favor of the vaccination mandate
The rule would affect about 80 million people and requires employers with 100 or more employees to make sure their employees are fully vaccinated or undergo regular testing and face covering at work. There are exceptions for those with religious objections.
The agency said it had the authority to act under a temporary emergency standard designed to protect employees if they are exposed to “serious danger.”
The Biden administration defended the regulation, arguing that the nation is facing a pandemic “that is sickening and killing thousands of workers across the country” and that any delay in implementing the requirement to get vaccinated or undergo periodic tests “will result in lead to unnecessary harm, illness, hospitalization and death. “
During oral arguments, the Biden administration had asked that, at a minimum, if the court says employers cannot require employees to be vaccinated, it should leave in place an alternative requirement for the use of masks and frequent testing. The majority rejected that request on Thursday.
Steve Vladeck, a Trends Wide Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law, said the ruling on the trade mandate could have far-reaching effects in future cases on the power of government.
“These cases were not referendums on vaccination mandates, which can still come from states, local governments and private companies, they were referendums on whether these types of political decisions by experts are better taken by experts from agencies responsible to the president or by judges responsible. to anyone, “Vladeck said. “And if the answer is the latter, that will be true long after, and in contexts far beyond, the immediate response to the covid pandemic.”
Mandate for health workers
Although judges were receptive to previous attempts by states to require vaccines, the new disputes centered on federal requirements that raised different legal issues.
Cases come to the Supreme Court in an unusual stance, because justices are only being asked to block requirements while legal challenges unfold.
The court allowed the vaccination policy implemented in November by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services of the US Department of Health and Human Services to take effect, which sought to require the Covid-19 vaccine for certain workers in the United States. medical care in hospitals, nursing homes, and other facilities that participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
According to government estimates, the mandate regulates more than 10.3 million healthcare workers in the United States. Covered personnel were originally supposed to receive the first dose by December 6, and the mandate allows for some religious and medical exemptions.
Two lower courts had blocked the mandate in 24 states.
Judge Samuel Alito, along with Conservatives Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, disagreed.
“Neither CMS nor the Court articulate a limiting principle of why, after an unexplained and unwarranted delay, an agency can regulate first and listen later, and then put more than 10 million healthcare workers to choose between their jobs or irreversible medical treatment, “Alito wrote.
Biden, disappointed
President Joe Biden responded to the Supreme Court’s decision to block his administration’s vaccination requirement or the proof requirement of large companies, but allow the vaccination mandate for certain healthcare workers.
Today’s Supreme Court decision to uphold the healthcare worker requirement will save lives – the lives of patients seeking care at medical facilities, as well as the lives of the doctors, nurses, and others who work there. ”Biden wrote. “It will cover 10.4 million health workers in 76,000 medical facilities. We will enforce it ”.
“At the same time, I am disappointed that the Supreme Court has chosen to block common sense life-saving requirements for employees of large companies that were directly based on both science and the law,” the president said, calling on the testing requirements and the use of mask “a very modest load”.
Going forward, the president said that “it is now up to individual states and employers to determine whether to make their workplaces as safe as possible for employees, and whether their businesses will be safe for consumers during this pandemic by requiring them to employees who take the simple and effective steps to get vaccinated ”.