Biden overstepped authority in COVID vaccine mandate, argue Hanford workers

A federal judge was correct to dismiss claims by Hanford nuclear reservation site workers who said they were harmed by a COVID-19 vaccine requirement, according to recent arguments by federal attorneys in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Just over 300 Hanford contractor employees and a few Department of Energy employees sued President Joe Biden and other officials over vaccine mandates in a federal court case dismissed by U.S. Judge Thomas Rice in May 2022.

Plaintiffs appealed that ruling and an earlier dismissal of their request to have vaccine mandates temporarily halted to the 9th Circuit.

The Department of Justice is arguing in the appeal that only seven of the plaintiffs in the dismissed case were denied exemptions requested on religious grounds

And those seven plaintiffs did not identify their religious beliefs or show how the federal emergency order prevented the exercise of their religion, federal attorneys said.

Other plaintiffs had requests for exemptions granted, were awaiting a decision on their exemption requests or had voluntarily received the vaccine, according to federal attorneys.

None showed that they faced imminent harm from the requirement, attorneys argued.

The Department of Energy continues to strongly encourage all federal employees to be vaccinated, but it is not currently enforcing a requirement for COVID-19 vaccinations for those who are employed by DOE or its contractors.

A Jan. 5 DOE report stated the current COVID-19 vaccine policy and noted the ongoing litigation of the 2019 vaccine requirement for federal employees and one or more court orders prohibiting the enforcement of the requirement for DOE contractor employees.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs pointed out to the 9th Circuit that while the Hanford case was dismissed, the federal government has been stopped from enforcing the vaccine mandate for contractor employees in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee and Wyoming.

Plaintiff attorneys are Nathan Arnold of Seattle and S. Pete Serrano, a Pasco city councilman and director of the nonprofit Silent Majority Foundation based in Pasco.

Against COVID vaccine order

They argued that Biden overstepped his authority under the federal Procurement Act when he mandated COVID-19 vaccines or an exemption for federal contractor employees.

“Prior to September 2021, the federal government has never, under the Procurement Act or otherwise, mandated vaccination for a civilian population,” they wrote in a court briefing.

Typically vaccine requirements are made at the state level, and Congress would need to act to give that authority to the federal government, they argued. The administration cannot mandate an irreversible medical procedure, they said.

The COVID vaccine orders undermine the efficient delivery of contractor service to the federal government by creating unsafe conditions at federal nuclear facilities if workers’ “jobs may be taken at any moment on a political whim,” plaintiff attorneys said.

At the Hanford site in Eastern Washington, about 11,000 federal and other workers are employed in environmental cleanup of the site that produced nearly two-thirds of the plutonium for the nation’s nuclear weapons program from World War II through the Cold War.

The vaccine orders also violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act by failing to achieve federal goals by the least restrictive means possible, instead forcing workers to choose between their religious beliefs and livelihoods, they said.

Some workers were placed on leave without pay, they said.

Support for COVID vaccine order

Federal attorneys argued to the 9th Circuit Court that the vaccine orders were appropriate under the federal Procurement Act.

More than 1 million Americans have died from COVID-19 and the disease led to massive economic disruption, with the global economy contracting by 3.5% in 2020, they said.

They pointed out that the federal judge concluded that safeguards against COVID decrease worker absences, reduce labor costs and improve efficiency at federal contractor worksites, which are all appropriate under the Procurement Act.

This is not the first time the Procurement Act has been used to promote a healthy contractor workplace, they said.

Former President Obama issued an order requiring federal contractors to provide their employees with paid sick leave to improve their health and performance and ensure that federal contractors remain competitive with other employees.