> Insights > Supreme Court Blocks Osha’s Covid Vaccination-Or Test Rule

By: Ashleigh N. Johnson

> Insights > Supreme Court Blocks Osha’s Covid Vaccination-Or Test Rule

By: Ashleigh N. Johnson

Supreme Court Blocks Osha’s Covid Vaccination-Or Test Rule By: Ashleigh N. Johnson

In a relatively quick turnaround, the US Supreme Court issued a pair of per curiam orders on January 13, 2022, blocking the Biden Administration’s “vaccine-or-testing” rule aimed at large employers, while allowing a separate rule mandating vaccination for certain health care workers to continue—for now. 

The Court’s first order blocked the Emergency Temporary Standard issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”). The OSHA rule required businesses that have over 100 workers to adopt either a COVID-19 vaccination mandate or have workers submit to weekly tests and wear face coverings.  The OSHA rule, published by the agency on November 5, 2021, was stayed by a number of lower courts.  The Court’s majority found that OSHA had exceeded its authority in issuing the vaccine mandate or test rule, stating, “The Act empowers [OSHA] to set workplace safety standards, not broad public health measures…no provision of the Act addresses public health more generally, which falls outside of OSHA’s sphere of expertise.” The ruling grants the stays of the OSHA rule pending further proceedings.

The second-order, issued by a vote of 5-4 of the justices, gave the federal government leave to enforce a separate workplace vaccination rule issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) while the Biden administration appeals two injunctions that blocked part of the rule.  The CMS, the majority found, acted within the authority granted to it by Congress.  “Congress has authorized the [CMS] to impose conditions on the receipt of Medicaid and Medicare funds that ‘the Secretary finds necessary in the interest of the health and safety of individuals who are furnished services.” The majority found that the rule issued by the CMS “fits neatly” within the terms of the statute.

 

The relevant opinions can be found here:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a240_d18e.pdf

 

Ashleigh N. Johnson

Partner – St. Louis

ajohnson@foleymansfield.com

314-925-5705

ashleigh.jpg

Related Practice Areas & Industries

View All Practice Areas & Industries

Related Locations

View All Locations

Related Professionals

View All Professionals

Recent News & Insights

  • Los Angeles Attorney Timothy C. Pieper Elevated to Partner

    Foley Mansfield is proud to announce the elevation of attorney Timothy C. Pieper to Partner. Based in the firm’s Los Angeles office, Tim has played an integral role...

  • Foley Mansfield Team Secures Summary Judgment for Client in Asbestos Matter

    A Foley Mansfield team, including Los Angeles Partners Thomas Scully and Angie Kim, successfully handled a Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of their client, Warren Rupp, in...

  • Foley Mansfield Team Secures Appellate Win Upholding Forum Non Conveniens Transfer

    Recently, a Foley Mansfield team consisting of Chicago Managing Partner Demetra Christos and Attorney Jessica Espinoza successfully argued a forum transfer on behalf of their client in an...

  • Foley Mansfield Team Authors Article on Minnesota’s New Junk Fees Law for MDLA

    A Foley Mansfield team based in Minneapolis, including Attorney Paul Magyar and Law Clerk Sarah Chaoui, recently authored an article for the Minnesota Defense Lawyers Association’s Minnesota Defense...