Supreme court decisions today vaccine1/12/2024 They argue that because of "the vast economic and political significance" of this rule, congress, would have to expressly authorize a vaccine-or-test mandate. They argue that the law exceeds what Congress intended in enacting the OSHA statute, and they go further, contending that if Congress did intend to give such broad rulemaking power to the agency, it would be unconstitutional. That said, it has never enacted a vaccine-or-test rule like this one.Īmong the challengers are more than half the states, almost all Republican-dominated, including a dozen that have made vaccination mandates illegal. ![]() But the OSHA rule was enacted under a very broad statute which allows the agency to issue emergency rules when it deems them "necessary" to protect workers from a "grave danger." What's more, OSHA has previously applied its rule-making to diseases, including HIV and hepatitis, and required employers to pay for the hepatitis-B vaccine for at-risk workers. The OSHA regulation is different from the CMS rule because it was enacted, not under Congress' spending power, but under Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, a target of many current court conservatives. "We're paying for people to get dialysis treatment, we don't want the consequence of our funding their dialysis treatment to be they get COVID," says Case Western Reserve professor Jonathan Adler in summarizing the government's position. Of the two rules before the Supreme Court, the mandate for healthcare providers is generally considered easier to defend because the courts have long held that when the federal government funds a program -like Medicare or Medicaid -it has the authority to put conditions on how the money is used, to ensure that it is used wisely, efficiently, and that it is not being used to expose patients to greater risks. For instance, when the Houston Methodist Hospital system imposed a vaccine mandate, only 153 workers out of more than 61,000 resigned rather than comply. But the Biden administration points to studies showing that less than 1% of healthcare workers have left their jobs as the result of vaccine mandates. Those challenging the CMS rule contend that millions of healthcare workers will leave their jobs, rather than comply with the mandate. The only exceptions are for medical or religious reasons. The second regulation under scrutiny, issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, mandates vaccinations for all employees at hospitals, nursing homes, and other health care providers that receive federal funds. The other option is multiple testing," which costs money, in contrast to the vaccine, which is free. "It puts a wedge between me and my staff, having to make them decide whether or not they want to get vaccinated, or I can potentially have to terminate them. ![]() "The problem here is the mandate itself," he said in a video prepared by the conservative Liberty Justice Center, which represents him. The rule is being challenged by a coalition of large and small business groups, 27 states, and individuals.Īmong them is Brandon Trosclair, owner of 15 grocery stores in Louisiana. ![]() The only exceptions are employees who work at home or outside. It requires that all workers be vaccinated or tested weekly, and that the unvaccinated wear masks. That's nearly two-thirds of the private sector workforce. One, issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration applies to all companies that employ 100 or more workers. ![]() All of this will play out in front of a Supreme Court with all the justices vaccinated and boosted, sitting in a near empty chamber, with an audience limited to reporters, counsel and court staff, and in a building that is closed to the public to protect those who work there.Īt the heart of Friday's argument are two new federal regulations issued to deal with the pandemic.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |