Posted on 11/09/2021 10:40:50 AM PST by ducttape45
A federal court on Monday declined to block the White House’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates for federal government employees and military service members.
In a 41-page memorandum opinion, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly denied emergency relief sought by several avowedly “devout” Christians who have argued that being forced to take the vaccine would compromise their “closely held religious beliefs.”
The Washington, D.C.-based judge’s decision to rule against the numerous plaintiffs in the case, some of whom are members of the U.S. Marine Corps, however, is largely a product of their own recent victories against the Biden administration in the exact same court.
On Oct. 29, Judge Kollar-Kotelly, a Bill Clinton appointee, issued a minute order that appeared to preclude any form of punishment for the plaintiffs who are seeking religious exemptions to the two vaccine mandates in question.
“Defendants indicate that none of the civilian employee plaintiffs will be subject to discipline while his or her request for a religious exception is pending,” the minute order notes. “Defendants also indicate that the active duty military plaintiffs, whose religious exception requests have been denied, will not be disciplined or separated during the pendency of their appeals.”
The plaintiffs are currently seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in addition to the promises they’ve already secured from the Biden administration through their litigation. Having personally helped the plaintiffs obtain those promises while their lawsuit makes its way through the court system, the judge denied outright those ancillary requests to halt the mandates entirely.
Judge Kollar-Kotelly explained:
Plaintiffs’ “extraordinary” request for immediate injunctive relief is not merited. At this early stage of the proceedings, the record reflects that each Plaintiff has requested an exemption to the very COVID-19 vaccine mandates they challenge. These exemption requests all remain pending, and during their pendency, no Plaintiff faces disciplinary action for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine. Plaintiffs, therefore, come before this Court complaining of a compulsory inoculation they may never need to take, and of adverse employment actions they may never experience.
“This uncertainty weighs decisively against the ripeness of Plaintiffs’ claims and the irreparability of their purported injuries,” the court continued. “Emergency injunctive relief is not appropriate under these circumstances.”
Of the 18 federal employees who have requested such exemptions, one has had their request granted while the other 17 are currently pending.
“This exempted status currently allows the Federal Employee Plaintiffs to raise their religious objections to the vaccine, while also retaining their federal jobs,” the court noted. “Under these circumstances, the Federal Employee Plaintiffs cannot rely on the presumption of irreparable harm that attaches to First Amendment violations because no such violation has yet occurred. And it is unclear if any such violation will ever occur.”
The two Marines who have had their requests denied have both filed appeals and each has been granted a “temporary administrative exemption” to the vaccine requirements imposed on all members of the armed forces by the Department of Defense in August after the FDA formally approved the vaccine created by Pfizer BioNTech, which can now be marketed for “the prevention of COVID-19 disease in individuals 16 years of age and older.”
“[T]he [Marines] have also failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success that their claims are ripe,” the court observed.
Kollar-Kotelly goes on to explain that the military itself has several additional layers of internal administrative procedures that the service member plaintiffs must exhaust before their lawsuit can go any further–and notes that the plaintiffs haven’t factored those procedures into their request to stop the mandates.
The judge’s ruling responded directly to the “ultimatum” language that was used in the request.
“For example, [the federal employees and service members] broadly argue that forcing an individual to choose between complying with their faith or maintaining their federal employment violates constitutional and statutory rights,” the judge notes. “But because the Federal Employee Plaintiffs have pending requests for religious exemptions from the vaccine mandate, it remains uncertain whether they will ever face this supposed ‘ultimatum.'”
In other words, none of the plaintiffs currently face any adverse consequences, in part because of their prior efforts to stay ahead of the mandates, so their First Amendment-based concerns do not currently entitle them to the extraordinary relief of a full-on vaccine mandate kibosh.
In a separate matter on Saturday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit temporarily blocked the Biden administration from enforcing a vaccine mandate for private employers (i.e, the OSHA mandate) “pending further action by this court.”
Thoughts? At first glance, this does not bode well. Wondered what you all thought.
“ Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but the judge is saying basically that since no one has been harmed by the mandate, and exemptions are still being reviewed, that there’s no need to void the mandate? What kind of logic is that???”
————————————————————————————————-
Because no one has been fired yet or any other repercussions from the mandate.
I don’t have a case if a Walmart has a wet floor just because they have a wet floor.
But if I fall on the wet floor…….there are now damages.
Easy, his real name is Ernst Janning.
I have been resisting a conclusion I have made today. We live in a lawless dictatorship. Can’t sugar coat that. It is.
It’s one retarded judge. That’s my thought.
It’s one retarded judge. That’s my thought.
It’s one retarded judge. That’s my thought.
Hopefully expedited to a better fed court today. Is next step SCOTUS or a circuit court?
Sorry for posting 3 times.
This has been a ruling roller coaster mandate...it will eventually end up in the Supreme Court’s lap. Praying they rule on the side of freedom of choice!
Posted on the other thread:
RESOURCE: Tracking Legal Action & Legislation Against Covid-19 Mandates
She was a FISA court judge so that means she’s deep state.
Yeah, me too.
Two things will put Covid behind us.
1) Herd immunity (by any means) and coming soon.
2) Ending of All Government action, mandates, restrictions. State and Federal.
For historical accuracy the Janning character played by Burt Lancaster was a take on the real Nazi judge Oswald Rothaug.
I believe I remarked that there would be a finding amounting to “NO Standing”. never mind violation of civil rights since that can’t exist either until someone is jabbed or dies. That is strange since I can be tried for threats without ever having hurt or killed someone. Isn’t that strange to you?
Isn’t it also strange that I can be intimidated and ruined financially in defense of false charges as well as having my reputation ruined gy the giverment; all without consequence to the giverment, the judges or the persons who execute the intimidation?
This is Liberty? No, it isn’t.
Seemed reasonable to me. The marines have not been punished so no damage done.
So the judge ruled not to block the mandate, but blocked any punishment under the mandate until the case is concluded.
Last that I heard that there was no mandate.
The vaccine mandates should be fought on the grounds that the vaccines are not working against the spread of covid and that they have shown to be spreading it.
I think we have a rabid dog for a government.
We took it in, we fed it, cared for it and it once cared for us, we even loved it, but now it is rabid and there is only one thing left to do if we choose not to let it hurt us any further. I leave that to your imagination.
Almost everybody cried at the end of Old Yeller but it had to end the way it did. Remember though, Yeller fathered pups.
In all likelihood, if you are an unjabbed giverment employee of any stripe, you will be terminated. Probably right about Christmas time unless they wait until after the first of the year for some sense of optics.
Merry Christmas comrade. Good luck finding another job after you have been branded.
It is time we stop denying and face facts. We have sugar coated things like this for too long and they just get worse.
That is what I think.
I learned yesterday that the plaintiff in this case is a grocery store employer of over 500 employees, and has filed this challenge on behalf of his employees, believing they should have freedom of choice. He is a devout Christian and a member of Family Worship Center in Baton Rouge LA. Jimmy Swaggart Ministries
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.