In a 6-3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted a temporary stay of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS).
To read this article in its entirety, please click here.
Vaccine
SCOTUS Questioning Suggests OSHA ETS is Squeezing an Elephant into a Mousehole
By Melanie L. Paul & Katharine C. Weber on
Posted in Articles, COVID-19, OSHA Enforcement, OSHA ETS, OSHA Legislation, OSHA Rulemaking, Vaccine
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in the OSHA ETS case. Of course one never knows how the Court will rule, but if the Justices’ questions are any indication, there could be a 6-3 split in favor of a stay, with Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, Justice Kavanaugh, and…
Sixth Circuit Dissolves Stay of OSHA Vaccine ETS, OSHA Sets New Enforcement Dates
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has lifted the Fifth Circuit’s stay of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) on COVID-19 vaccination and testing for employers with at least 100 employees. Multiple parties, including 27 states, have filed emergency motions with the U.S. Supreme Court to block…
Sixth Circuit Deals Blow to OSHA’s Proposed Expedited Briefing Schedule, Says it Will Keep ETS Case
By Melanie L. Paul on
In what is getting to be habit in the OSHA ETS litigation with courts issuing orders late Friday afternoons, the Sixth Circuit on December 3, 2021 tersely denied a petition to transfer the case back to the Fifth Circuit. In the same order, the Sixth Circuit also denied, without explanation, the union petitioners’ bid to…
Petitioners Ask 6th Circuit to Hear OSHA ETS Challenge En Banc with All Active Judges
By Melanie L. Paul on
Posted in Articles, COVID-19, OSHA Enforcement, OSHA ETS, OSHA Guidance, OSHA Legislation, OSHA Rulemaking, Vaccine
Four separate groups of petitioners challenging the OSHA ETS, including a coalition of 27 states, have asked the court to hear the OSHA challenge en banc, arguing that the case involves a question of exceptional importance in that it is an “unprecedented mandate of COVID vaccines based on a rarely used law of questionable applicability.”…