02-12-2021, 02:05 PM
Could this happen?
I'll will not submit
Certificate
Of
Vaccination
I
D
States have authority to fine or jail
people who refuse coronavirus vaccine,
attorney says
Legal precedent dates back to 1905
By: Derek Staahl Posted
at 5:50 PM, Aug 07, 2020
and last updated
9:14 AM, Aug 11, 2020
(SAN DIEGO (KGTV)) --
As drugmakers race to develop a vaccine against the coronavirus,
several legal questions are emerging: could the government require
people to get it? Could people who refuse to roll up their sleeves
get banned from stores or lose their jobs?
The short answer is yes, according to Dov Fox, a law professor and
the director of the Center for Health Law Policy and Bioethics at the
University of San Diego.
“States can compel vaccinations in more or less intrusive ways,” he
said in an interview. “They can limit access to schools or services or
jobs if people don’t get vaccinated. They could force them to pay a
fine or even lock them up in jail.”
Fox noted authorities in the United States have never attempted to
jail people for refusing to vaccinate, but other countries like France
have adopted the aggressive tactic.
The legal precedent dates back to 1905. In a landmark
U.S. Supreme Court case, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the court ruled
Massachusetts had the authority to fine people who refused
vaccinations for smallpox.
That case formed the legal basis for vaccine requirements at schools,
and has been upheld in subsequent decisions.
“Courts have found that when medical necessity requires it, the public
health outweighs the individual rights and liberties at stake,” Fox said.
In 2019, New York City passed an ordinance that fined people who
refused a measles vaccination.
That said, recent protests over face coverings show there could be
significant backlash to a vaccine mandate, Fox said. Just because states
have the power to do it, doesn’t mean it’s the best public policy, he added.
Although states would have the authority to mandate vaccinations,
there’s more doubt about whether Congress could enact a federal requirement.
The most likely federal vaccination requirement would come in the form of
a tax penalty, but Fox said given the current composition of the Supreme Court,
a federal vaccine requirement would likely be found unconstitutional.
Opponents of a federal mandate would cite the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision
on the Affordable Care Act, Fox said. In that case, the justices ruled that Congress
could not use its powers to regulate interstate commerce to require people to buy
health insurance, even though the ACA’s individual mandate was ultimately upheld
on separate grounds.
That means the U.S. could have a patchwork of different vaccine requirements in
different states.
States that explore a vaccine requirement should only do so if the vaccine is widely
and readily available, Fox said.
“Otherwise you create an underclass of people who are less safe and without access
to the basic means of society,” he said.
States would need to allow exemptions for people with legitimate medical risks, like
pregnancy, but not exemptions on religious or philosophical grounds, he said.
“Religious exemptions are not constitutionally required by the First Amendment’s Free
Exercise clause, provided that the vaccine mandates don’t single out religion; they’re
not motivated by a desire to interfere with it,” he said.
In the workplace, private employers would have a lot of flexibility to require vaccinations
and fire workers who refuse them for anything but legitimate medical concerns.
As long as employers show there are significant costs associated with having unvaccinated
workers, they would not need to offer religious exemptions to employees, Fox said.
Under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, employers are not required to accommodate religious
employees if doing so would pose more than a “de minimis,” or minimal cost.
I'll will not submit
Certificate
Of
Vaccination
I
D
States have authority to fine or jail
people who refuse coronavirus vaccine,
attorney says
Legal precedent dates back to 1905
By: Derek Staahl Posted
at 5:50 PM, Aug 07, 2020
and last updated
9:14 AM, Aug 11, 2020
(SAN DIEGO (KGTV)) --
As drugmakers race to develop a vaccine against the coronavirus,
several legal questions are emerging: could the government require
people to get it? Could people who refuse to roll up their sleeves
get banned from stores or lose their jobs?
The short answer is yes, according to Dov Fox, a law professor and
the director of the Center for Health Law Policy and Bioethics at the
University of San Diego.
“States can compel vaccinations in more or less intrusive ways,” he
said in an interview. “They can limit access to schools or services or
jobs if people don’t get vaccinated. They could force them to pay a
fine or even lock them up in jail.”
Fox noted authorities in the United States have never attempted to
jail people for refusing to vaccinate, but other countries like France
have adopted the aggressive tactic.
The legal precedent dates back to 1905. In a landmark
U.S. Supreme Court case, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the court ruled
Massachusetts had the authority to fine people who refused
vaccinations for smallpox.
That case formed the legal basis for vaccine requirements at schools,
and has been upheld in subsequent decisions.
“Courts have found that when medical necessity requires it, the public
health outweighs the individual rights and liberties at stake,” Fox said.
In 2019, New York City passed an ordinance that fined people who
refused a measles vaccination.
That said, recent protests over face coverings show there could be
significant backlash to a vaccine mandate, Fox said. Just because states
have the power to do it, doesn’t mean it’s the best public policy, he added.
Although states would have the authority to mandate vaccinations,
there’s more doubt about whether Congress could enact a federal requirement.
The most likely federal vaccination requirement would come in the form of
a tax penalty, but Fox said given the current composition of the Supreme Court,
a federal vaccine requirement would likely be found unconstitutional.
Opponents of a federal mandate would cite the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision
on the Affordable Care Act, Fox said. In that case, the justices ruled that Congress
could not use its powers to regulate interstate commerce to require people to buy
health insurance, even though the ACA’s individual mandate was ultimately upheld
on separate grounds.
That means the U.S. could have a patchwork of different vaccine requirements in
different states.
States that explore a vaccine requirement should only do so if the vaccine is widely
and readily available, Fox said.
“Otherwise you create an underclass of people who are less safe and without access
to the basic means of society,” he said.
States would need to allow exemptions for people with legitimate medical risks, like
pregnancy, but not exemptions on religious or philosophical grounds, he said.
“Religious exemptions are not constitutionally required by the First Amendment’s Free
Exercise clause, provided that the vaccine mandates don’t single out religion; they’re
not motivated by a desire to interfere with it,” he said.
In the workplace, private employers would have a lot of flexibility to require vaccinations
and fire workers who refuse them for anything but legitimate medical concerns.
As long as employers show there are significant costs associated with having unvaccinated
workers, they would not need to offer religious exemptions to employees, Fox said.
Under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, employers are not required to accommodate religious
employees if doing so would pose more than a “de minimis,” or minimal cost.