Court rehears fight over vaccine mandate for federal workers
Legal Compliance
President Joe Biden has the same authority to impose a COVID-19 vaccine requirement on federal workers that private employers have for their employees, an administration lawyer told a federal appeals court Tuesday.
A lawyer for opponents of the vaccine requirement, which has been blocked nationwide by a federal judge in Texas, said the requirement imposes an “unconstitutionally intolerable choice” for executive branch workers — taking a vaccine they don’t want or losing their jobs.
Judges on the appeals court meanwhile questioned how far the chief executive’s authority goes, asking, theoretically, whether the president could require employees to meet certain healthy body weights or forbid them from smoking at home.
It was the second time arguments on the issue were heard before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. A three-judge panel of the same court had upheld the Biden requirement for executive branch workers, overturning the Texas judge.
But the full appeals court, currently with 16 active members, vacated the panel ruling and agreed to rehear the case. There was no indication when the court would rule.
Administration lawyers argue that the employees opposing the mandate should have taken their objections not to federal court but to a federal review board, in accordance with the Civil Service Reform Act. The administration also argues that the president has the same authority, under the Constitution, as the CEO of a private corporation to require that employees be vaccinated.
Related listings
-
Appeals court puts Georgia PSC elections back on ballot
Legal Compliance 08/12/2022A federal appeals court on Friday ordered that statewide elections for two Georgia public service commissioners be put back on the November ballot, only a week after a federal judge postponed the elections after finding that electing the five commiss...
-
Ex-cop Kueng gets 3 years for violating Floyd’s rights
Legal Compliance 07/27/2022Former Minneapolis police Officer J. Alexander Kueng was sentenced Wednesday in federal court to three years in prison for violating George Floyd’s civil rights during the May 2020 killing.Kueng’s co-defendant Tou Thao was scheduled to be...
-
Louisiana seeks suspension of block on enforcement
Legal Compliance 07/22/2022A day after a state judge blocked enforcement of Louisiana’s abortion ban, state officials asked the same judge to suspend his own ruling while they pursue an appeal.Lawyers for state Attorney General Jeff Landry and health secretary Courtney P...
What Is Meant by ‘No-Fault’ Workers’ Compensation in Illinois?
If you were injured in a work-related accident and have been researching workers’ compensation, you may have seen it described as a “no-fault” system. One of the most important things to understand about the workers’ compensation system in Illinois is that it is based on a “no-fault” system. What does this mean, exactly?
Most employers in Illinois are required by law to have workers’ compensation insurance. And the workers' compensation in Illinois is a “no-fault” system, which means that any worker who has been hurt on the job is entitled to workers' compensation benefits. If you have been hurt on the job, you are entitled to workers’ compensation benefits no matter whose fault the accident was.
A no-fault insurance system, such as workers’ comp, works by paying claims regardless of who is to blame for an accident. This provides an important layer of protection for injured workers, sparing them from having to through additional litigation and the through the additional burden of proving who was at fault before receiving benefits.
In Illinois, even though you don’t have to prove that your injury was your employer’s fault, you do have to prove that your injury happened at work or as a result of work. If you would like help to file your workers' compensation claim, Krol, Bongiorno, & Given’s experienced workers' comp lawyers are here to help. With over 60 years of combined legal experience, the KBG law firm is a leader in the field of workers’ compensation law and we have earned the reputation as aggressive advocates for injured workers before the IWCC.