Oral arguments in the legal challenge to federal COVID-19 vaccine regulations for some employers were heard by the United States Supreme Court. Ohio, along with 26 other states, was the listed plaintiff in the litigation against President Joe Biden’s regulation. Attorneys arguing for the federal rule claim that OSHA has the jurisdiction to establish these types of workplace safety policies. Furthermore, the court action is about the overreach of a government regulatory agency and the executive branch, not the vaccine’s efficacy.
With the Omicron variation causing a spike in covid cases across the country, the Supreme Court is prepared to determine whether two of President Joe Biden’s vaccine policies will go into action on January 10th as planned. During the oral arguments on January 7th, Justice Sotomayer called in two attorneys to present their arguments from a telephone call because they contracted Covid-19. Despite their illness, it provides a clear picture of how the United States views its workers in trying times as hearings proceeded. The hearings imply that the conservative justices may undermine Mr. Biden’s plan to urge 84 million workers in large corporations to get vaccines. If this is the case, large businesses may decide to halt their efforts to comply with the requirement.
The Covid circumstances did not seem to persuade the six conservatives on the court’s belief that the administration overstepped its jurisdiction in requiring vaccines or testing for enterprises with more than 100 employees. Roberts and Donald Trump’s two newest judges, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, are likely to determine the outcome in both cases since they have been more sympathetic to state-level vaccine mandates than the other three conservative justices.
This blog post is part of the CIMA Law Group Blog. If you are in need of legal help, the CIMA Law Group is a law firm in Phoenix, Arizona which possesses expertise in Immigration Law, Criminal Defense, Personal Injury, and Government Relations.
CIMA Law Group Blog 