A federal judge has granted in part a preliminary injunction against Santa Clara County’s requirement that its employees be vaccinated against COVID-19.
Northern District of California U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman ruled that prioritizing employees in high-risk roles with medical and disability exemptions over those with religious exemptions for placement into vacant County positions of lower risk likely will not survive constitutional scrutiny.
“Plaintiffs face hardships from being sent to the back of the line for consideration for County positions in lower- or intermediate-risk tiers based on the fact that their exemption is religious, which likely violates their constitutional rights,” Freeman wrote in her June 30 order.
As previously reported in the Southern California Record, UnifySCC sued the county alleging that its COVID-19 vaccine mandate and its accommodations for those that obtain exemptions violate the First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
“Although right now we won a narrow injunction, we're ultimately seeking to enjoin the entire risk tier system because we believe it's completely arbitrary and there's no basis for how they've classified certain employees as riskier than other employees,” said Mariah Gondeiro, an attorney for Advocates for Faith and Freedom who represents the plaintiffs.
The County established its risk-tier system that classifies employees as low, medium or high risk in response to the pandemic, according to the complaint.
“This is the first type of vaccine-related policy that has been enjoined and it’s great for the employees in Santa Clara County,” Gondeiro told the Southern California Record. “We have a good position now when trying to get attorneys' fees and damages for these employees.”
More than 50 county employees have been put on unpaid leave, according to Gondeiro.
“The ruling is very helpful in California because it puts counties on notice that they can't just discriminate against religion and if employees have adequate and valid religious exemptions, they have to make an effort to actually accommodate them and they have to have justification for why they don't,” she said.