Supreme Court Rules OSHA Does Not Have Police Power to Mandate Vaccinations.

No. 21A244, 21A247
In the Supreme Court of the United States
_______________
National Federation of Independent Business, et al., Applicants,
v.
Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, et
al., Respondents
_______________
Ohio, et al., Applicants,
v.
Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, et
al., Respondents
On Emergency Application of Administrative Action and Petition for Writ of Certio-
rari to the United States Courts of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
_______________
Motion for Leave to File and Brief of
The IU Family for Choice, not Mandates, Inc. as Amicus Curiae in Support
of Applicants; for Leave to File Without 10-Days’ Notice; and for Leave to
File Pursuant to Sup. Ct. Rule 33.2
_______________
James Bopp, Jr.
Counsel of Record
jboppjr@aol.com
Courtney Turner Milbank
cmilbank@bopplaw.com
Melena S. Siebert
msiebert@bopplaw.com
Cassandra Dougherty
cdougherty@bopplaw.com
THE BOPP LAW FIRM, PC
1 South Sixth St.
Terre Haute, IN 47807−3510
Telephone: 812/232−2434
Counsel for AmicusMotion for Leave to File1
The IU Family for Choice, not Mandates, Inc. (“IUFCNM”) respectfully
moves for leave to file a short brief as amicus curiae in support of Applicants’
Emergency Applications for Immediate Stay of Agency Action Pending Disposition
of Petition for Review. Applicants consented to, and federal Respondents took no
position on, the filing of the enclosed amicus brief.
Amicus respectfully requests that the Court consider the arguments
presented in the enclosed amicus brief in support of Applicants’ applications in No.
21A244 and No. 21A247. The attached amicus brief will be helpful to the Court as it
considers the merits of the emergency application for immediate stay.
The brief demonstrates that this case presents a unique opportunity for this
Court to define the proper role of government in decisions impacting medical
treatment choice. In doing so, Amicus suggest that this Court take the opportunity
to provide guidance regarding the proper judicial review standards that should be
applied in such cases.
Statement of Movant’s Interest
IUFCNM is a grassroots coalition of Indiana University students, parents,
Alumni, and concerned community members advocating for medical autonomy and
equal treatment of all university students, faculty, and staff. IUFCNM stands firm
in its belief that everyone has sovereignty and freedom of choice to make medical
1 No counsel for any party authored the following amicus brief in whole or in
part, and no person other than amicus or its counsel made a monetary contribution
to its preparation or submission.
iBrief of The IU Family for Choice, not Mandates, Inc.
as Amicus Curiae in Support of Applicants
Table of Contents
Interest of Amicus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction and Summary of the Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
I. COVID Vaccines Are a Medical Treatment, Not a Public Health Measure. . . . . . 3
A. The FDA Classifies the COVID Injections as “CBER-Regulated
Biologics,” or Therapeutics, Not as Traditional Vaccines. . . . . . . . . . . 3
B. COVID Vaccines Do Not Prevent the Spread of the COVID Virus. . . . 3
C. Since the COVID Vaccines Do Not Stop the Spread of COVID, They
Are Not a Public Health Measure, But a Medical Treatment. . . . . . . . 5
II. OSHA’s Emergency Provision Exceeds Its Authority.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A. OSHA Does Not Have the Authority to Mandate
Medical Treatment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. OSHA’s Emergency Provisions Violate Its Stated Fundamental
Principles of Bioethics.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2. OSHA Has Previously Acknowledged That It Lacks the Power to
Force Medical Treatment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3. Other federal agencies have indicated opposition to employers
forcing medical treatment on employees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
B. OSHA Does Not Have Police Power to Mandate Vaccinations. . . . . . 10
III. OSHA’s Emergency Provisions Should be Subject to Heightened Scrutiny
Under Both the Constitution and Under the Pre-enforcement “Harder-Look”
Doctrine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
A. Mandating Medical Treatment is Governed by Cruzan and Subsequent
Forced Medical Treatment Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B. Jacobson Does Not Apply But If It Did, Constitutional Rights
Could Be Asserted.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
C. Constitutional Jurisprudence Related to Forced Medical
Treatment, Outside of the Penal Context, Requires Heightened
Scrutiny. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
D. Under Heightened Scrutiny, the Burden Shifts to OSHA to Justify its
Emergency Provision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
iv E. The “harder look” also required for pre-enforcement agency review
supports heightened scrutiny. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
v Table of Authorities
Cases
Associated Industries of N.Y. State, Inc. v. U.S. Dept. of Labor, 487 F.2d 342 (2d Cir.
1973) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak, 140 S. Ct. 2603 (2020) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 17
Color Pigments Mfrs. Ass’n, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Admin., 16 F.3d
1157 (11th Cir. 1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Cruzan v. Dir., Missouri Dep’t of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990) . . . . . . . . . . 11, 13, 17
EEOC v. Neenah Paper, Inc., JVR No. 1606170018, No. 2:15-cv-00113 (W.D. Mich.
Mar. 31, 2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
F.C.C. v. Beach Commc’ns, Inc, 508 U.S. 307 (1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 16, 18
Heller v. Doe by Doe, 509 U.S. 312 (1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts,197 U.S. 11, 30 (1905). . . . . . . . 17, 18
McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 572 U.S. 185 (2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Planned Parenthood of Se. Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Riggins v. Nevada, 504 U.S. 127 (1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Roberts v. Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain Railroad, 29 Hun, 154. . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Roman Catholic Diocese v. Cuomo, 141 S. Ct. 63 (2020) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Russell v. Richards, 384 F.3d 444 (7th Cir. 2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
vi Sell v. United States, 593 U.S. 166 (2003) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 21
Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Union Pac. R. Co. v. Botsford, 141 U.S. 250 (1891) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 12
United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
United States v. Seaton, 773 F. App’x 1013 (10th Cir. 2019) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Vitek v. Jones, 445 U.S. 480 (1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 14, 15
Walsh v. Sayre, 52 How. Pract. 334. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Witt v. Department of the Air Force, 527 F.3d 806 (9th Cir. 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Wolfe v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Zucht v. King, 260 U.S. 174 (1922) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Constitutions, Statutes, and Rules
29 U.S.C. § 651(b). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 10
Administrative Procedure Act, §§ 551 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Sup. Ct. R. 21.2(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Sup. Ct. R. 33.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Sup. Ct. R. 33.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Sup. Ct. R. 33.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Sup. Ct. R. 37.2(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Other Authorities
Alicia Ault, Can a COVID-19 Vaccine Stop the Spread? Good Question, Medscape
Medical News, (Nov. 20, 2020), https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/941388.. . . 4
American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, About ACOEM,
Code of Ethics, https://acoem.org/about-ACOEM/Governance/Code-of-Ethics . . . . 7
vii Asbestos Information Ass’n/North America v. Occupational Safety and Health
Admin., 727 F.2d 415 (5th Cir. 1984) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Interim Public Health
Recommendations for Fully Vaccinated People (Updated Oct. 15, 2021),
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-
guidance.html. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
FDA, Coronavirus (COVID-19) | CBER-Regulated Biologics,
https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/industry-biologics
/coronavirus-covid-19-cber-regulated-biologics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
FDA, Coronavirus Treatment Acceleration Program (CTAP),
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/coronavirus-covid-19-drugs/coronavirus-treatment
-acceleration-program-ctap. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Immunization: The Basics, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL, September 1, 2021,
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Immunization: The Basics, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL, July 18, 2021, archived
at
https://web.archive.org/web/20210718162209/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/i
mz-basics.htm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Josh Blackman, The Irrepressible Myth of Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 70 Buff. L.
Rev. at 9 (2021) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Judge Thomas Cooley, Cooley on Torts 29 (1st ed. 1888) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Kasen K. Riemersma, et al., Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar
viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant,
medRxiv (pre-print),
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387v1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Madeline Holcombe, Fully vaccinated people who get a Covid-19 breakthrough
infection can transmit the virus, CDC chief says, CNN (Updated Aug. 6, 2021),
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html . . . . . 4
Office of Teaching & Digital Learning, Boston University School of Public Health,
What is Public Health?, BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS (October 21, 2015) ,
https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPH-Modules/PH/PublicHealthHistory. . . . . . . . 5
Omicron spreading and infecting the vaccinated – WHO, Reuters (Dec. 20, 2021),
https://www.aol.com/news/1-omicron-
viii