The U.S. Supreme Court today issued two rulings related to the federal government’s COVID-19 vaccination requirements for large businesses and Medicare/Medicaid health care providers.
Below are highlights from the rulings.
In re: National Federation of Independent Business v. OSHA, the Supreme Court considered a vaccination requirement for large employer with 100 or more employees. In staying the implementation of the rule pending a decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in the pending cases challenging the rule, the justices provided the following reasoning for their decision:
We do not doubt, for example, that OSHA could regulate researchers who work with the COVID–19 virus. 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. OSHA’s indiscriminate approach fails to account for this crucial distinction—between occupational risk and risk more generally—and accordingly the mandate takes on the character of a general public health measure, rather than an “occupational safety or health standard.” 29 U. S. C. §655(b) OSHA’s COVID–19 Vaccination and Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard, is stayed pending disposition of the applicants’ petitions for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and disposition of the applicants’ petitions for writs of certiorari, if such writs are timely sought.
The Supreme Court also issued a separate ruling in Biden v. Missouri, which allowed the vaccine requirement for employees of Medicare and Medicaid health care providers to proceed. In its ruling imposing a stay of the preliminary injunctions issued by the Fifth Circuit and Eighth Circuit Courts of Appeal, pending a decision by those courts in the cases challenging the rule pending before them, the justices provided the following reasoning for their decision. The Supreme Court stated:
The challenges posed by a global pandemic do not allow a federal agency to exercise power that Congress has not conferred upon it. At the same time, such unprecedented circumstances provide no grounds for limiting the exercise of authorities the agency has long been recognized to have. We accordingly conclude that the Secretary did not exceed his statutory authority in requiring that, in order to remain eligible for Medicare and Medicaid dollars, the facilities covered by the interim rule must ensure that their employees be vaccinated against COVID–19.
A more detailed analysis about the Supreme Court’s rulings in these important cases will be forthcoming.
Add a comment
Topics
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Employment Discrimination
- Employment Agreement
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Human Resources
- Wage & Hour
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- National Labor Relations Act
- At Will Employment
- Minimum Wage
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- COVID-19
- National Labor Relations Board
- Coronavirus
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Noncompete Agreements
- No Tax on Overtime
- Overtime
- Payroll
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- Arbitration
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Civil Rights
- Regulatory Law
- Contract Employees
- Title VII
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Sick Leave
- Tax Law
- Workplace Harassment
- Earned Sick Time
- Retaliation
- Transgender Issues
- OSHA Issues
- Contracts
- Unemployment Benefits
- Federal Trade Commission
- Business Risk Management
- Hostile Work Environment
- Civil Litigation
- Settlements
- ERISA
- Workers' Compensation
- Accommodations
- Cannabis
- Public Education
- LGBTQ
- Class Actions
- Department of Justice
- Medicare Issues
- Sexual Harassment
- Garnishments
- Social Media
- Retail Liability
- RICO
- Emergency Information
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Title IX
- Medical Marijuana
- Right to Work
- Union Organizing & Relations
Recent Updates
- Department of Labor Proposes Rule Altering Joint Employer Analysis
- Federal Policy Favors Arbitration but Poor Drafting Derails Enforcement
- An Employers Guide to New OBBBA Overtime Reporting Requirements
- Federal Court Rules State Discrimination Claims Subject to Mandatory Arbitration
- Are Boilerplate Terms in Employment Applications Enforceable?
- Is Your Business Ready for Pay Transparency Laws?
- Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split in Reverse Discrimination Cases
- Michigan Legislature Avoids Chaos by Amending Earned Sick Time Act Just Prior to Deadline
- Implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: Key Insights for Employers
- Federal Court Throws out DOL’s Attempt to Rewrite White Collar Overtime Rules




