News
Featured Image
U.S. Supreme CourtShutterstock

WASHINGTON (LifeSiteNews) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to consider a case put forward by healthcare professionals in Maine who argue their state’s COVID jab mandate “explicitly discriminates against religious exemptions,” signaling a willingness by the Court to uphold coercive jab requirements in spite of religious objections. 

The Supreme Court’s decision comes after it had previously rejected an emergency request to block the mandate last year, and leaves in place an appeals court ruling upholding the sweeping mandate. 

Maine’s COVID jab mandate, announced by Democrat Gov. Janet Mills in August 2021, requires all healthcare workers in the New England State to take the experimental, abortion-tainted shots with no option for a religious exemption.

The Epoch Times reported that the group of healthcare workers challenging the mandate argued that requiring the jabs without offering a religious exemption violates federal law and the U.S. Constitution.

Many Americans harbor religious and ethical reservations about the use of cells from aborted babies in the development of the COVID-19 jabs currently on the market. 

Represented by Liberty Counsel, a conservative legal group, the healthcare workers filed a lawsuit seeking to block the jab mandate last year. 

However, their request for a preliminary injunction was denied by an Obama-appointed judge, and an appeals court upheld the ruling. 

Petitioners then requested “emergency relief” from the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2021, and after their petition was turned down, “filed a writ of certiorari, asking justices to take time to review the lower court decisions.”

The Epoch Times reported that the petitioners “asserted the appeals court erred in its ruling, including when it found that the availability of medical exemptions without any consideration of religious exemption requests does not violate the First Amendment.”

The second request to the Supreme Court was again knocked down, with at least six of the nine Supreme Court justices on Tuesday opting to reject the petition.

Reuters noted, “The justices were divided, with three conservative members saying they would have granted the request.”

While the way each justice voted has not been publicized, when the Supreme Court rejected the group’s emergency request in October Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito dissented. Trump appointees Barrett and Kavanaugh used “discretionary consideration” to block the request.

Mathew Staver, chairman for Liberty Counsel, told the Epoch Times it was “disappointing to see the court ignoring this clear injustice.”

“We thought it was a great case for the court to take,” Staver continued, contending that Maine’s COVID jab mandate presents “a clear conflict and a clear violation of federal law.”

This isn’t the first time the Supreme Court has upheld jab mandates for healthcare employees.

In January, despite knocking down the Biden administration’s sprawling COVID jab mandate for large businesses, the Supreme Court upheld the federal healthcare worker mandate in a 6-3 ruling.

At least 10 Republican-led states have subsequently filed lawsuits against the Biden administration for its federal healthcare worker jab mandate.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

15 Comments

    Loading...