Tag: EO14042

Government Contractor FAQ: What’s up with the Vaccine Mandates?

Scott Arnold, Justin A. Chiarodo, Stephanie M. Harden, and Samarth Barot

Lawsuits challenging the Biden Administration’s many vaccine mandates have changed the compliance landscape over the last few months. This post summarizes the current status of the four major mandates:

      1. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) mandate;
      2. Healthcare Worker mandate;
      3. Federal Employee mandate; and
      4. Federal Contractor mandate.

Spoiler alert: The Federal Contractor mandate–which has caused the most significant confusion for Government contractors since its issuance–still does.

1. OSHA Mandate

OSHA’s Emergency Temporary Standard (“ETS”) required that all employees of employers with 100 or more employees either be fully vaccinated or wear a mask and submit to weekly COVID‑19 testing. On January 13, 2022, the Supreme Court upheld a preliminary injunction of the OSHA mandate, finding that it likely exceeded OSHA’s authority.

Status: Withdrawn (OSHA announced that it was withdrawing the ETS on January 26, 2022).

Continue reading “Government Contractor FAQ: What’s up with the Vaccine Mandates?”

Government Contractor Q&A: Impact of Nationwide Injunction Prohibiting Enforcement of Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate

Scott Arnold, Justin A. Chiarodo, and Stephanie M. Harden

Stephanie Harden's Headshot Photo

Yesterday the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of Executive Order (“EO”) 14042, under which prime contractors and subcontractors are required to ensure that all of their employees working “on or in connection with” covered federal contracts are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 (“Vaccine Mandate”). The order was issued in a lawsuit filed by the States of Georgia, Alabama, Idaho, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia; governors of several of those states; and various state agencies that challenged the Biden Administration’s authority to issue the Vaccine Mandate. In its decision, State of Georgia, et. al. v. Biden, No. 1:21-cv-163, the court agreed with the plaintiffs’ argument that the Administration improperly relied on the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (“FPASA”) to issue the Vaccine Mandate, concluding that the FPASA’s authorization for the President to impose policies to promote economy and efficiency in procurement did not extend to polices focused primarily on public health.

Continue reading “Government Contractor Q&A: Impact of Nationwide Injunction Prohibiting Enforcement of Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate”