Two cases involving Biden’s attempts to expand vaccinations have been fast-tracked by the Supreme Court. On Wednesday night, the justices announced they will hear oral arguments on two federal policies on Jan. 7: a vaccine-or-test requirement for large employers, and a vaccine mandate for health care workers at government facilities.
In both disputes, the court heard emergency cases last week. The formal question in both is whether the government should be permitted to enforce the policies while the litigation challenges them. But the justices differ on whether to grant emergency relief will likely be influenced by their views on the merits of the underlying challenges themselves.
In over a dozen separate requests, the challengers asked the Supreme Court to overturn the 6th Circuit’s decision. A group of trade associations and a group of states both filed requests for oral arguments on Wednesday night.
As long as the Supreme Court does not act on the 6th Circuit’s ruling, the mandate will remain in force, though OSHA has indicated it will not issue citations until January 10 at the earliest.
On Monday, the Biden administration asked the court to temporarily enforce a rule issued by the Department of Health and Human Services requiring all health care workers participating in Medicare or Medicaid to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 unless they are exempted for medical or religious reasons. (Translation: do what we say or lose your funding. Legality does not enter this discussion …)
In approximately half of the states, lower court rulings prevented the administration from enforcing its vaccine mandate. The justices will hear arguments on whether these rulings should stand.
On Wednesday, the court decided to hold an oral argument on the emergency requests: It seemed more likely that the court would dispose of the requests with a brief order, as it normally does on the so-called “shadow docket.” However, in response to criticism of the shadow docket’s increased use in litigating major policy disputes, the justices decided to have the cases heard orally.
I have a neighbor who is so concerned about her student loans that she will not even look at what is going on even though it’s being done by the same group.
