The Supreme Court will resume its session earlier than initially planned to hold a special hearing on Friday, Jan. 7, on the Biden administration’s vaccine-or-testing mandates for large employers and a vaccine requirement for certain healthcare workers. The court had planned on returning the following Monday.
The two cases had been on the court’s “shadow docket,” where time-sensitive emergency applications are decided on an expedited basis, without full briefings and arguments. That’s been how the court has ruled on multiple controversial issues from the shadows. That includes effectively ending abortion rights in Texas, though they eventually heard that case. It’s how the court struck down the government’s eviction moratorium.
It’s what the court used to overthrow longstanding precedent that kept the court away from what has been seen as the executive branch’s domain, foreign policy, to force President Biden to keep Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” immigration policy.
So at least this time, they’ll actually have to go through the motions of having a regular hearing before the five, possibly six, conservatives decide to interfere in policy-making in the executive branch. One of the mandates requires businesses with 100 or more employees to either impose a vaccination or testing mandate for those employees. The second requires health care workers at hospitals receiving federal funding to be vaccinated. The question for the court on Jan. 7 is whether the policies should remain in force while the lawsuits against them proceed in lower courts.
The policies have been challenged in several suits around the country, from religious groups, business groups, Republican-led states, healthcare workers, and others. In November, the 5th Circuit enjoined the mandate, but it was reinstated earlier this month when that case and other challenges were consolidated in the 6th Circuit. Challengers immediately appealed to the Supreme Court with more than a dozen separate requests.
It’s somewhat encouraging that the court is responsive enough to criticism of its shadow docket rampage to hear this case. Following the announcement from the court, the Biden administration said it would defend the orders vigorously.
“Especially as the U.S. faces the highly transmissible omicron variant, it is critical to protect workers with vaccination requirements and testing protocols that are urgently needed,” said Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, adding: “We are confident in the legal authority for both policies.” The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has had legal authority since 1970 to issue rules—like this mandate—to prevent workers from being exposed to grave danger. The majority of judges in the 6th Circuit ruled that authority extends to COVID-19.
“The record establishes that COVID-19 has continued to spread, mutate, kill, and block the safe return of American workers to their jobs,” Judge Jane B. Stranch wrote for the majority. “To protect workers, OSHA can and must be able to respond to dangers as they evolve.”
That there’s a real question over whether the Supreme Court will allow the federal government to respond to a global pandemic to require these safety measures is a problem. Looking at the shadow docket decision by the court’s conservatives to end the eviction moratorium—a ruling that put countless lives in danger—it seems likely as not that the vaccine mandates won’t survive. There’s been ample proof from this court that the wingnut majority needs to be checked—even from one of their own.
Court expansion becomes more necessary by the day.
The two cases had been on the court’s “shadow docket,” where time-sensitive emergency applications are decided on an expedited basis, without full briefings and arguments. That’s been how the court has ruled on multiple controversial issues from the shadows. That includes effectively ending abortion rights in Texas, though they eventually heard that case. It’s how the court struck down the government’s eviction moratorium.
It’s what the court used to overthrow longstanding precedent that kept the court away from what has been seen as the executive branch’s domain, foreign policy, to force President Biden to keep Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” immigration policy.
So at least this time, they’ll actually have to go through the motions of having a regular hearing before the five, possibly six, conservatives decide to interfere in policy-making in the executive branch. One of the mandates requires businesses with 100 or more employees to either impose a vaccination or testing mandate for those employees. The second requires health care workers at hospitals receiving federal funding to be vaccinated. The question for the court on Jan. 7 is whether the policies should remain in force while the lawsuits against them proceed in lower courts.
The policies have been challenged in several suits around the country, from religious groups, business groups, Republican-led states, healthcare workers, and others. In November, the 5th Circuit enjoined the mandate, but it was reinstated earlier this month when that case and other challenges were consolidated in the 6th Circuit. Challengers immediately appealed to the Supreme Court with more than a dozen separate requests.
It’s somewhat encouraging that the court is responsive enough to criticism of its shadow docket rampage to hear this case. Following the announcement from the court, the Biden administration said it would defend the orders vigorously.
“Especially as the U.S. faces the highly transmissible omicron variant, it is critical to protect workers with vaccination requirements and testing protocols that are urgently needed,” said Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, adding: “We are confident in the legal authority for both policies.” The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has had legal authority since 1970 to issue rules—like this mandate—to prevent workers from being exposed to grave danger. The majority of judges in the 6th Circuit ruled that authority extends to COVID-19.
“The record establishes that COVID-19 has continued to spread, mutate, kill, and block the safe return of American workers to their jobs,” Judge Jane B. Stranch wrote for the majority. “To protect workers, OSHA can and must be able to respond to dangers as they evolve.”
That there’s a real question over whether the Supreme Court will allow the federal government to respond to a global pandemic to require these safety measures is a problem. Looking at the shadow docket decision by the court’s conservatives to end the eviction moratorium—a ruling that put countless lives in danger—it seems likely as not that the vaccine mandates won’t survive. There’s been ample proof from this court that the wingnut majority needs to be checked—even from one of their own.
Court expansion becomes more necessary by the day.