A Federal Appeals Court Directs San Francisco to Reinstate Employees Fired Over Vaccine Mandate
The recent verdict from a federal appeals court mandates San Francisco to reinstate workers previously dismissed for not adhering to the COVID-19 vaccination mandate. This decision overturns a prior ruling from a lower court.
An unanimous decision by a three-judge panel from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was issued last Thursday. The panel specified that San Francisco must reemploy staff who were terminated for not complying with the order requiring COVID-19 vaccinations for all city employees. The case was brought forward by Selina Keene and Melody Fountila, who declined the vaccine based on religious beliefs.
Beyond Keene and Fountila, the lawsuit also included over 100 additional plaintiffs, with the defendants being the city and county of San Francisco, Mayor London Breed, and leaders from both the San Francisco Public Library and the San Francisco Department of Public Health.
The court’s opinion referenced the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision (Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo), which invalidated COVID-19-related restrictions on worship in New York. The panel emphasized, “the Supreme Court has recognized that the loss of protected religious freedoms, ‘for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.’”
The ruling further articulated, “Appellants’ coerced decision between their faith and their livelihood imposed emotional damage which cannot now be fully undone.” They criticized the city’s stance, stating, “[San Francisco’s] finding that Appellants’ religious beliefs were insufficient to warrant any accommodations can only be described as a ‘dignitary affront’ … The circumstances surrounding Appellants’ termination constitute irreparable harm.”
The decision concluded with directions for the lower court to grant “preliminary injunctive relief consistent with this memorandum disposition,” recognizing that San Francisco’s mandate is no longer effective, thus posing “no burden” on the city due to the plaintiffs’ “noncompliance.”
Throughout the pandemic, various legal challenges emerged against state and federal COVID-19 vaccine mandates, highlighting claims that these mandates conflicted with personal religious convictions.
Some religious objections were based on ethical concerns regarding the vaccines’ development involving fetal cell research from abortions.
This ruling coincides with other favorable outcomes for those impacted by vaccine mandates. Notably, President Donald Trump issued an executive order last week, reinstating U.S. military personnel discharged for similar reasons.
This article was originally written by www.christianpost.com
