United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Reverses a Lower Court Decision Regarding COVID-19 Vaccine … – The Ark Valley Voice

Federal Court Rules University of Colorado Vaccine Policies Motivated by Religious Animus

Last week the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed a lower court decision, issuing a 55-page ruling holding that the University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicines policies refusing religious exemptions to its COVID-19 vaccination mandate were motivated by religious animus and unconstitutional under the First Amendments Religion Clauses.

The original mandate had been rejected by some university staff and students after a vaccine was developed in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. The court case was mounted by the conservative Thomas More Society, a not-for-profit law firm based in Chicago. In an appeal filed in March 2022, the firm represented 17 faculty and students who asserted that the university refused to accommodate their sincerely and deeply held religious objections that prevented them from taking the vaccine.

The University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus on the academic health sciences campus in Aurora, Colorado, houses the University of Colorados six health sciences-related schools and colleges. In September 2021, the university enacted and enforced a policy that all students, employees, and other individuals who currently or may in the future access any CU Anschutz facility or participate in any CU Anschutz program or otherwise interact with members of the Anschutz community regardless of location must become fully vaccinated against COVID-19 with a vaccine that has been approved by the World Health Organization.

COVID-19 vaccines. Photo by Daniel Schludi for unsplash

In addition to finding religious animus, the Court found that the vaccine mandates of the Universitys Anschutz Medical Campus granted exemptions for some religions, but not others, because of differences in their religious doctrines and granted secular exemptions on more favorable terms than religious exemptions, all of which was illegal.

The court also reaffirmed the First Amendment principle that the government may not test the sincerity of employees religious beliefs by judging the legitimacy of those doctrines. The Court also held that the Universitys mandates violated clearly established constitutional rights.

The University of Colorado ran roughshod over staff and students of faith during COVID, and the Court of Appeals has now declared plainly what weve fought to establish for almost three years: the University acted with religious animus and flagrantly violated the fundamental religious liberties of these brave healthcare providers and students, said Thomas More Society Executive Vice President & Head of Litigation Peter Breen.

These medical providers were hailed as heroes, as they served bravely on the front lines through the worst of the pandemic, but when their religious principles conflicted with the beliefs of the University of Colorado bureaucrats, these heroes were callously tossed aside. he added.

With this ruling in favor of our clients, the Court of Appeals has made clear that people of faith are not second-class citizens, he added. They are deserving of full respect and the protection of the United States Constitution in their free exercise of religion. By unlawfully and intrusively probing our staff and students religious beliefs, the university rendered value judgments that not only reeked of religious bigotry but violated our clients constitutional rights, as well as basic decency.

The Court of Appeals decision highlighted specific instances of what it referenced as religious discrimination, including the following:

. . . the Administration decided that it is morally acceptable for Roman Catholics to take vaccines against COVID-19, and that any Roman Catholic objections to the COVID-19 vaccine are personal beliefs, not religious beliefs. Id. at 116263. As a result, the Administration would not grant exemptions to Roman Catholic applicants under the September 1 Policy. (Slip Opinion, p. 5.)

. . . the Administration refused to approve any exemptions for Buddhist applicants under the September 1 Policy. Nor would the Administration approve any exemptions for members of the Roman Catholic Church or the Eastern Orthodox Church. At the same time, the Administration admitted it would approve applications from practitioners of select, favored religions, such as Christian Scientists. (Slip Opinion, p. 30.)

a government policy that grants an exemption for medical reasons but denies the same exemption for religious reasons is not generally applicable, as it devalues religious reasons . . . by judging them to be of lesser import than nonreligious reasons. The September 24 Policy on its face makes a value judgment in favor of secular motivations because it has a lower bar for denying religious exemptions.

Under its September 1, 2021 policy, the university declared that it would only accept requests for religious exemptions from those whose religions taught that all vaccines are forbidden. In addition, those seeking exemptions were required to justify their religious beliefs under questioning. Under its September 24, 2021 policy, the University entirely excluded students from religious exemptions and provided for medical exemptions on more generous terms than religious exemptions.

Read the May 7, 2024 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Jane Does 1-11 and John Does 1, 3-7 v. The Board of Regents of the University of Colorado, et. al. here [https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/63d954d4e4ad424df7819d46/663bd07a66d645d57f832e4a_010111045465.pdf].

Read the original:

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Reverses a Lower Court Decision Regarding COVID-19 Vaccine ... - The Ark Valley Voice