The Final Nail in the Coffin?: Federal Court Takes Action Against Vax Mandate

The COVID-19 Vaccination Mandate imposed upon federal employees and continued long after corresponding state and local mandates by the Biden administration was blocked by a federal appeals court on Thursday in the latest blow to Biden and his lingering COVID-related policies.

According to Fox News, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans overturned a ruling by a three-judge panel of the court that had previously upheld the mandate. The court initiated an atypical en banc hearing with all of the judges present and the full court struck down arguments from the Biden administration that claimed the court lacked jurisdiction to rule on pre-enforcement challenges to the policy.

The lawsuit, brought by Feds For Medical Freedom read in part, ”

“The department has burdened the exercise of religion by forcing religious believers to accept invasive and painful testing, stigmatizing masking, loss of professional opportunities, unequal accommodation procedures, and a culture of harassment and ridicule because of their disfavored religious beliefs.”

As noted by Fox News, the lawsuit alleges that the Department of State has taken “an uneven, lackadaisical approach to issuing religious accommodations, while at the same time ratcheting up pressure on those who have expressed religious belief to vaccinate, despite their convictions.”


The three-judge panel claimed that federal employees were required to bring their complaints to administrative agencies for adjudication rather than bringing a case to the courts such as the Merit Systems Protection Board or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. However, the full en banc court refuted that notion.

FINAL NAIL IN THE COFFIN: FEDERAL COURT SHOOTS DOWN BIDEN VACCINE MANDATE FOR CONTRACTORS


Judge Andrew Oldham, a nominee of President Donald Trump, penned the majority opinion concurred upon by nine other justices. He wrote, “We hasten to emphasize that this case only involves a preliminary injunction. The preliminary injunction’s purpose is to maintain the status quo until the parties have the chance to adjudicate the merits.”

“When the parties proceed to the merits in the district court, the plaintiffs will have to prove that whatever injunction they request is broad enough to protect against their proven injuries and no broader. And the Government will have another chance to show that any permanent injunction should be narrower than the preliminary one. And both sides will have to grapple with the White House’s announcement that the COVID emergency will finally end on May 11, 2023.”

The broad majority concluded that federal administrative law does not eliminate the courts’ jurisdiction over “private, irreversible medical decisions made in consultation with private medical professionals outside the federal workplace.”

According to The Associated Press, Judge Stephen Higginson, an Obama nominee dissented writing, “For the wrong reasons, our court correctly concludes that we do have jurisdiction. But contrary to a dozen federal courts — and having left a government motion to stay the district court’s injunction pending for more than a year — our court still refuses to say why the President does not have the power to regulate workplace safety for his employees.”

Biden issued his executive order in September of 2021, as noted in the ruling, it is set to expire on May 11, 2023.

You can follow Matt Holloway on FacebookTwitterTruthSocialGettrGab & Parler

READ THIS NEXT
BREAKING: James Comer Invites President Joe Biden To Testify In Impeachment Inquiry
WATCH: Trump Speaks Out After Visiting With Family Of Murdered NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller
'She Is The Go-To Messenger': Kellyanne Conway Could Make A Comeback On Team Trump
Sign in to comment

Comments

Powered by StructureCMS™ Comments

Get Updated

© 2024 DC Enquirer, Privacy Policy