As the legal reverberations of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to unfold, the U.S. Supreme Court may be poised to enter the fray once more, with several petitions related to COVID-19 vaccine mandates awaiting potential review in the 2025-26 term. These cases, which primarily address the controversial intersection of public health mandates and religious freedoms, hold the potential to shape future federal guidance on such pressing issues.
One of these cases, Does 1-2 v. Hochul, challenges a New York state mandate, repealed since its enactment in 2021, requiring hospital and nursing home employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. A group of unnamed workers argued that the mandate, as implemented by their employers, clashed with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by overriding religious accommodations. Their petition to the Supreme Court claims that the 2nd Circuit Court erroneously allowed state policy to override federal protections. The workers are seeking monetary damages for wrongful termination.
In a parallel dispute, Kane v. City of New York raises concerns over religious freedoms. This case also springs from a now-rescinded mandate in New York City requiring public education employees to be vaccinated. The plaintiffs, comprising teachers and school administrators, criticize the mandate’s discriminatory exemption processes, which they argue favored certain religions known for opposing vaccinations, while rejecting claims from those within religions supportive of vaccination, such as Catholicism.
Further complicating the landscape is Wilkins v. Herron, originating from Oregon. The plaintiff, Keith Wilkins, refused to comply with a school district’s policy requiring teachers to either be vaccinated or wear masks. His lawsuit contends that his rights under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act were breached as he was not adequately informed about the vaccine’s risks and benefits. Both a federal district court and the 9th Circuit Court have dismissed his claims, arguing the act does not provide a basis for individual legal action.
The Supreme Court’s upcoming decisions might clarify unresolved issues from its previous rulings on federal vaccine mandates during the pandemic, which resulted in somewhat mixed outcomes. In 2022, the court blocked a mandate for large employers while allowing mandates for healthcare facilities that receive federal funds. However, the court declined various other petitions, sometimes facing dissents from its more conservative members, suggesting nuanced perspectives within the court on these issues.
Legal professionals closely monitoring the constitutional debates might find interest in a related case, Miller v. McDonald. This non-COVID-related case challenges New York’s abolishment of religious exemptions from its school vaccine requirements, potentially paving the way for broader deliberations on religious liberties in the context of health mandates.
While the Supreme Court’s decision on which cases to hear is pending, the persistence of legal challenges linked to vaccination policies signals that the dialogue around pandemic-era mandates remains active and contentious. For further details on these developments, refer to the full analysis on SCOTUSblog.