Supreme Court Judges Make Big Moves Over Mandates

( Judges across the country are siding with universities and colleges that are providing exemptions to their mandates for COVID-19 vaccines.

The exemptions don’t even have to be solid, as court cases are proving. If they are limited, arbitrary or even ephemeral, they are being approved by judges.

The most recent case involved the University of Connecticut. One parent and two students challenged that university’s mandate for vaccines for all students. On Monday, Jeffrey Meyer a U.S. district judge, dismissed that lawsuit though, saying he doesn’t have the jurisdiction over the case.

In his ruling, Meyer said:

“The plaintiffs raise important constitutional questions” about how and whether the government can “condition access to public education on a student’s sacrifice of his or her right against unwanted medical treatment in the form of a highly invasive injection of a yet-to-be-fully approved vaccine.”

The problem in this case, as the judge pointed out, was that two of the plaintiffs ended up receiving an exemption to UCONN’s mandate after they filed suit. The third plaintiff wouldn’t apply for the exemption because he said the process was “unconstitutionally vague.”

Still, Meyer ruled that none of the plaintiffs, then, could demonstrate they were suffering from ongoing injury as a result of the university’s vaccine mandate.

In addition, UCONN’s liberal policy of giving out exemptions worked in its favor. In court filings, it said it had already granted 504 exemption requests through July, and it has another 267 pending. In fact, the university hasn’t denied any exemption for a non-medical reason yet.

At Indiana University, the vaccine mandate will go into effect next week following an emergency appeal ruling from Amy Coney Barrett, the Supreme Court justice who considers all emergency appeals from the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

She rejected the request for injunction without giving a full explanation.

That particular lawsuit attacked the university’s broad COVID-19 rules, which include testing twice a week for any students who aren’t vaccinated. Those students must also wear face masks. These rules apply even to students who are able to receive a religious or medical exemption to the university’s vaccine mandate.

Before the lawsuit was filed, Indiana University weakened its own mandate by removing a requirement that students had to prove they had a vaccine. That followed Todd Rokita, the state’s attorney general, saying it was illegal because Indiana had banned vaccine passports.

After the lawsuit was filed, the university went a step further, adding what it calls an “ethical exemption” to the mandate.

After all this happened, appeals judges in the 7th Circuit defended Indiana University’s mandate, process and appeals. They even wrote in their opinions that plaintiffs in the case aren’t mandated to attend Indiana University, and that there are many colleges across the country they could go to that don’t have vaccine mandates.

Still, the plaintiffs in the UCONN case aren’t resting yet. The attorney for the plaintiffs in that case, Ryan McLane, sent an email to Just the News that said:

“Right now, we’re heading back to the drawing board to see what we can do. I believe we had a strong oral argument and that our case can be distinguished from Indiana University.”