Breaking Legal News & Current Law Headlines | Daily Legal Briefing
  • Home
  • Hot Topics
  • Breaking
  • Business
  • Big Law
  • Small Law
  • Law School
  • Legal Tech
No Result
View All Result
No Result
View All Result
Breaking Legal News & Current Law Headlines | Daily Legal Briefing
No Result
View All Result
Home Hot Topics

Roberts, Kavanaugh votes key as SCOTUS upholds vaccine mandate for health workers but not for others

Daily Legal Briefing by Daily Legal Briefing
January 14, 2022
in Hot Topics
0
6th Circuit reinstates workplace vaccine mandate, says OSHA authority isn’t limited to hard hats, goggles
4
SHARES
32
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter


  1. Home
  2. Daily News
  3. Roberts, Kavanaugh votes key as SCOTUS upholds…

U.S. Supreme Court

Roberts, Kavanaugh votes key as SCOTUS upholds vaccine mandate for health workers but not for others

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 13, 2022, 2:02 pm CST

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday gave the Biden administration one loss and one win in its bid to impose vaccine requirements on health care workers and employees at larger companies.

The high court allowed a vaccine mandate for health care workers in health care settings that receive federal funds. But the court blocked a vaccine-or-test mandate for those who work at companies with more than 100 workers.

The votes of two justices were key, the New York Times and the Washington Post report.

The vote in the health care vaccine case, Biden v. Missouri, was 5-4. Two conservative justices—Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Brett M. Kavanaugh—joined with the court’s three liberal justices to form the majority.

The vote in the employer case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, was 6-3, with the court’s six conservatives forming the majority.

The court had heard arguments in the cases during a special hearing Friday. The court heard the cases in response to emergency applications.

In the employer vaccine case, the Supreme Court said the secretary of labor did not have authority to impose the mandate developed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

OSHA had required the vaccine at workplaces with at least 100 employees. Employers had the option of allowing workers to remain unvaccinated, however, if they wore masks and obtained a test each week.

OSHA had adopted the workplace mandate as an emergency temporary standard, an emergency rule that doesn’t initially have to go through the notice and comment practice.

But the Supreme Court said the Occupational Safety and Health Act did not authorize the secretary of labor to impose the mandate.

“The act empowers the secretary to set workplace safety standards, not broad public health measures,” the Supreme Court said in its per curiam opinion.

The court acknowledged, however, that OSHA may regulate “occupation-specific risks related to COVID–19.”

“We do not doubt, for example, that OSHA could regulate researchers who work with the COVID–19 virus,” the Supreme Court said. “So, too, could OSHA regulate risks associated with working in particularly crowded or cramped environments. But the danger present in such workplaces differs in both degree and kind from the everyday risk of contracting COVID–19 that all face.”

Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan wrote a joint dissent. They argued that the majority misapplied legal standards and hampered the government’s ability to counter “the unparalleled threat” of COVID-19.

“Underlying everything else in this dispute is a single, simple question: Who decides how much protection, and of what kind, American workers need from COVID–19?” the dissenters wrote. “An agency with expertise in workplace health and safety, acting as Congress and the president authorized? Or a court, lacking any knowledge of how to safeguard workplaces, and insulated from responsibility for any damage it causes?”

In the health care case, the Supreme Court said the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (currently Xavier Becerra, since March 2021) has long required infection control at hospitals and other facilities that receive Medicare and Medicaid funds. The vaccine rule falls within the secretary’s statutory authority, the court said in its per curiam opinion.

“Of course, the vaccine mandate goes further than what the secretary has done in the past to implement infection control,” the court said. “But he has never had to address an infection problem of this scale and scope before. In any event, there can be no doubt that addressing infection problems in Medicare and Medicaid facilities is what he does.”

Justice Clarence Thomas dissented in the health care case, joined by Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

Thomas said the government wrongly relied on “a hodgepodge of scattered provisions” to justify the mandate. Had Congress wanted to grant the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services the power to impose a vaccine mandate across all facility types, “it would have done what it has done elsewhere—specifically authorize one,” he wrote.

See also:

ABAJournal.com: “Supreme Court doesn’t interfere with New York COVID-19 vaccine mandate, despite lack of religious exemption”

ABAJournal.com: “Supreme Court sets special hearing on vaccine mandates for larger workplaces, health workers”

ABAJournal.com: “6th Circuit picked to consider 34 challenges to vaccine mandate; these plaintiffs filed initial suits there”

ABAJournal.com: “6th Circuit reinstates workplace vaccine mandate, says OSHA authority isn’t limited to hard hats, goggles”

ABAJournal.com: “Will employer vaccine mandate survive? OSHA would act under little-used statutory provision”





Click to Read Original Article

Previous Post

Your Greatest Flaws May Be Your Greatest Gift – My Shingle

Next Post

‘Shameful!’ Judge blasts cancer patient for failing to maintain his lawn

Daily Legal Briefing

Daily Legal Briefing

Related Posts

Judge imposes default judgment against former Littler Mendelson client for ‘subversive approach to discovery’
Hot Topics

5th Circuit tells lawyer it is ‘often advisable to read the court’s orders,’ upholds $1,250 sanction

by Daily Legal Briefing
April 12, 2022
Law firm’s managing partner had a ‘fixation’ with employee surveillance, wiretap suit says
Hot Topics

Law firm’s managing partner had a ‘fixation’ with employee surveillance, wiretap suit says

by Daily Legal Briefing
April 12, 2022
Law school applicants are down, for now, for the first time since 2018
Hot Topics

Following a boost in 2021, national average score for February 2022 MBE drops

by Daily Legal Briefing
April 12, 2022
Google violated its ‘don’t be evil’ code when it fired 3 outspoken employees abiding by mandate, suit says
Hot Topics

Google’s ‘privileged’ email labeling, said to prevent lawsuit disclosure, was ‘eyebrow raising,’ judge says

by Daily Legal Briefing
April 11, 2022
New law allows this state’s judges to personally solicit campaign donations; ethics opinion adds wrinkle
Hot Topics

New law allows this state’s judges to personally solicit campaign donations; ethics opinion adds wrinkle

by Daily Legal Briefing
April 11, 2022
Next Post
‘Shameful!’ Judge blasts cancer patient for failing to maintain his lawn

'Shameful!' Judge blasts cancer patient for failing to maintain his lawn

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Premium Content

ATL’s 12th Annual Legally Themed Halloween Costume Contest: ‘Post’-Pandemic Edition

ATL’s 12th Annual Legally Themed Halloween Costume Contest: ‘Post’-Pandemic Edition

November 25, 2021
The Legal Tech-To-English Dictionary: Legal Research

The Legal Tech-To-English Dictionary: KPIs And Reporting Tools

January 7, 2022
A Quick Guide to Aged Care Compliance

A Quick Guide to Aged Care Compliance

July 8, 2022

Browse by Category

  • Big Law
  • Breaking
  • Business
  • Hot Topics
  • Law School
  • Legal Tech
  • Small Law

About US

Breaking Legal News & Current Law Headlines | Daily Legal Briefing.
Online coverage of breaking legal news and current law headlines from around the US. Top stories, videos, insight, and in-depth analysis.

Categories

  • Big Law
  • Breaking
  • Business
  • Hot Topics
  • Law School
  • Legal Tech
  • Small Law

Recent Updates

  • Baker McKenzie Investigating Racism Claims; Partner Steps Away From Leadership Role
  • This Biglaw Firm Has The Urge To Merge, But Can’t Find A Willing Partner
  • Why The Legal Work Experience Is Broken And How You Can Do Better

© 2021 Daily Legal Briefing | Breaking Legal News & Current Law Headlines

No Result
View All Result
  • Contact Us
  • Home

© 2021 Daily Legal Briefing | Breaking Legal News & Current Law Headlines

Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?