On November 30, 2021, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of the federal contractor and subcontractor vaccine mandate requirements issued by the Safer Federal Workforce Undertaking Power in reaction to President Biden’s Govt Purchase 14042, Guaranteeing Ample COVID Security Protocols for Federal Contractors. The mandate needs included contractor workers to be absolutely vaccinated by January 18, 2022. Our prior postings on the contractor mandate can be found here.
Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove’s final decision arrived in a circumstance filed by Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and Sheriffs from two Counties in Ohio, in their formal capacitates, in the U.S. District Courtroom for the Jap District of Kentucky, a person of far more than a dozen worries now pending prior to federal courts. Listed here, Judge Van Tatenhove located that President Biden most likely exceeded his authority below the Federal House and Administrative Solutions Act. Specifically, the Judge expressed worry that allowing the mandate to stand would: (1) restrict competitors in the procurement approach (2) violate the constitutional nondelegation doctrine and (3) infringe on rights reserved for the states under the Tenth Amendment. As a end result, Decide Van Tatenhove halted enforcement of the vaccine mandate for federal contractors and subcontractors in all included contracts in Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee. He appears to have remaining other facets of the COVID-19 necessities, these as masking and social distancing tips, in effect.
Accordingly, for the time being, lined contractors are no more time mandated to have to have their lined workers in Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee to be vaccinated. And even though the preliminary injunction issued in Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al. v. Joseph R. Biden, et al. only applies to covered contracts in Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee, 20 other states are now tough the mandate in various jurisdictions and non-point out get-togethers have introduced additional promises – meaning all lined contractors should really be watching intently to see whether equivalent injunctions are issued in states where by they have lined personnel.
It is unclear regardless of whether the federal authorities will seek out to have the injunction lifted, and irrespective of whether such an hard work will be prosperous. What is clear is that the legal approach will proceed for some time, leaving contractors in a condition of limbo as they assess what their compliance obligations are now and put together to alter as people obligations improve.
© 2021 Proskauer Rose LLP. National Law Critique, Volume XI, Quantity 335