OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected a request to block a federal mask mandate at U.S. airports and domestic air travel.
A father filed an emergency application on behalf of himself and his 4-year-old autistic son, both of whom say they are medically incapable of wearing masks for extended periods of time.
“Their request was filed to Justice Neil Gorsuch, who handles emergency applications arising in several Western states, and he referred the matter to the full court. The justices denied the request without comment or noted dissent,” The Hill reported.
“Under an executive order signed by President Biden, the Transportation Security Administration requires passengers on airplanes and other public transportation to wear masks to reduce the spread of the coronavirus, which has killed more than 850,000 in the U.S.,” the outlet added.
“Joining the father-son challengers was another man, Lucas Wall, who has sought to raise money and publicity from his legal efforts targeting the federal transportation mask mandate. Chief Justice John Roberts last month unilaterally rejected a separate challenge filed by the group,” the outlet continued.
“The court’s move comes less than a week after the justices issued a split decision on another set of Biden administration pandemic mitigation measures. Last Thursday, the court voted 6-3 to block a vaccine-or-test mandate for large employers but voted 5-4 to maintain a vaccine mandate for health providers at federally funded facilities,” the report concluded.
Last week, the Supreme Court struck down the Biden administration’s directive that businesses with 100 or more employees must either get vaccinated or tested weekly.
“The workplace rule, which the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, announced last fall, required companies with 100 or more employees to ensure that their workers either get vaccinated or wear masks and show negative Covid test results at least once a week,” NBC News reported.
The court’s conservative majority said the administration had gone too far in imposing such a sweeping requirement on the nation’s businesses.
“Although Congress has indisputably given OSHA the power to regulate occupational dangers, it has not given that agency the power to regulate public health more broadly,” the conservative justices wrote in an unsigned opinion. “Requiring the vaccination of 84 million Americans, selected simply because they work for employers with more than 100 employees, certainly falls in the latter category.”
The three liberal justices disagreed in their dissent.
“In the face of a still-raging pandemic, this court tells the agency charged with protecting worker safety that it may not do so in all the workplaces needed,” the liberal justices wrote. “As disease and death continue to mount, this court tells the agency that it cannot respond in the most effective way possible. Without legal basis, the court usurps a decision that rightfully belongs to others. It undercuts the capacity of the responsible federal officials, acting well within the scope of their authority, to protect American workers from grave danger.”
Karen Harned, the executive director of the group’s small business legal center, said the Supreme Court ruling was a “welcome relief” to businesses struggling to keep afloat during the pandemic. She expressed optimism that with the OSHA rule now halted, the lower courts will proceed to find the regulation illegal.
“As small businesses try to recover after almost two years of significant business disruptions, the last thing they need is a mandate that would cause more business challenges,” Harned said.
