In a stunning reversal, a federal judge in St. Louis has granted a preliminary injunction that prevents President Biden’s administration from imposing a COVID-19 vaccine mandate on healthcare workers while the court reviews its legality.
“Congress did not clearly authorize CMS to enact the this politically and economically vast, federalism-altering, and boundary-pushing mandate, which Supreme Court precedent requires,” wrote U.S. District Judge Matthew Schelp in his Nov. 29. memorandum and order. “Even if CMS has the authority to implement the vaccine mandate—which the Court finds is unlikely, as discussed above—the mandate is likely an unlawful promulgation of regulations.”
As previously reported, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt sued the Biden administration in the Eastern District of Missouri federal court over a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) order requiring 17 million health care workers to be vaccinated against COVID-19 by Jan. 4 with no option for testing for those who want to opt-out of immunization.
Schmitt along with the attorneys general for the states of Nebraska, Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, and New Hampshire alleged in the complaint that the CMS mandate is an unconstitutional exercise of spending power and that it violates the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), the Social Security Act, Anti-Commandeering Doctrine, the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and federalism.
“The health care workers in facilities that participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs in these 10 states have had their burdens lifted by this exceptional court decision,” said Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel.
Schelp’s preliminary injunction applies to certified providers and suppliers of Medicare and Medicaid in each of the plaintiffs’ states.
“Although Judge Schelp’s injunction applies only to 10 states, for now, I suspect other states will intervene to extend the ruling, and other lawsuits are pending in 12 additional states,” Staver added. “It seems obvious that the legal reasoning will apply to all the states since it involves a nationwide rule.”
Defendants named in the lawsuit include Biden, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and CMS.
CMS argued that the mandate was implemented under a good cause exception, which was based on data showing the arguable importance of vaccination against COVID-19 to protect public health.
However, Schelp disagreed with the applicability of good cause.
“CMS’s delay in requiring mandatory vaccination undermines its contention that COVID is an emergency such that it has the 'good cause' necessary to dispense with notice and comment requirements,” Schelp wrote. “The COVID pandemic is an event beyond CMS’s control, yet it was completely within its control to act earlier than it did. The mere desire or need to have the mandate does not suffice for a good cause. And good cause is not automatically created based on an agency’s conclusion that bypassing the notice and comment requirements is necessary to protect public safety.”
AG Schmitt argued that CMS acted without the approval of Congress in issuing the mandate and Schelp agreed.
“CMS seeks to overtake an area of traditional state authority by imposing an unprecedented demand to federally dictate the private medical decisions of millions of Americans,” Schelp wrote. “Such action challenges traditional notions of federalism.”