Posted on 04/20/2022 5:19:13 PM PDT by ducttape45
A second appeals court has upheld the vaccine mandate for federal employees that was issued by President Biden last year.
A panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously said that federal employees cannot sue over the vaccine mandate and must instead challenge the mandate through the usual appeal channels available to the federal workforce through the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA). In other words, federal employees would have to face discipline for refusing to get the COVID vaccine before they could appeal the decision administratively.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals came to the same conclusion earlier this month when it upheld the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate.
The Biden administration initially said it would not reinstate the federal employee vaccine mandate but then also was petitioning the court to allow the mandate to be immediately reinstated.
According to Reuters, the Justice Department told the court that it should be allowed to immediately resume enforcing the mandate because it is “justified by the serious ongoing harm to the public interest and to the government.”
As of right now, the Biden administration has not issued any additional information regarding resuming enforcement of the federal employee vaccine mandate via the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force.
Notice how it says, "A panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals." Apparently these courts are letting more 3 person panels make the decision for the whole circuit court. Hopefully this can go en banc and get overturned.
Vaccine Update Ping List
Keeping the thumb down. And who appointed these judges.
Robes have failed.
” In other words, federal employees would have to face discipline for refusing to get the COVID vaccine before they could appeal the decision administratively.”
Well, it sounds like this is not ruling on the legal merits of the mandate at all, just ruling that the employees have to suffer actual harm (being disciplined and exhausting their normal appeals under the civil service law) before they have standing to ask the court to intervene.
The Robes are not bound by the mandates.
Misleading headline. The court did not back the mandate. They just ruled the plaintiffs did not go through the proper channels.
Well, it sounds like this is not ruling on the legal merits of the mandate at all, just ruling that the employees have to suffer actual harm (being disciplined and exhausting their normal appeals under the civil service law) before they have standing to ask the court to intervene.
________________________________________
True. Just another crap headline from the press.
Federal judges are employees of Fedzilla.
They will always protect Fedzilla.
they are now murderers KNOWINGLY before the fact.
murderers in black robes protecting child rapists
and eaters-of-terrified-children.
that is why they wear black robes over their red shoes.
It’s in there, or #3.
That is the process. Most courts will dismiss a suit where other remedies exist. Then losses in the administrative procedures can be appealed in the courts.
Every employer has the right to make rules for employees. It is never the other way around.
“Anyone else here surprised by this? Not me.”
Not me, either. Legally, it was the right ruling. The proper course is through the civil service commission, as federal employees are subject to civil service rules and regulations.
Stop the BS. 255 million Americans have already been jabbed. I have not seen 255 million dead in news. Not even 255,000 (that would be 0.01%). Hospital admittance has a far higher kill ratio than the jabs.
“Hospital admittance has a far higher kill ratio than the jabs.”
what kind of BS is this??
https://realrawnews.com/2022/04/bidens-health-chief-praises-chinas-covid-death-camps/
And Republicans ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.